Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 18.884
Копенгаген; Всемирная организация здравоохранения. Европейское региональное бюро; 2023. (WHO/2019-nCoV/Vaccines/SAGE/Prioritization/2023.1).
in Russian | WHOIRIS | ID: gwh-371051
Front Immunol ; 13: 864718, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244339


mRNA based vaccines against COVID-19 have proven most successful at keeping SARS-CoV-2 pandemic at bay in many countries. Recently, there is an increased interest in heterologous prime-boost vaccination strategies for COVID-19 to maintain antibody responses for the control of continuously emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoCs) and to overcome other obstacles such as supply shortage, costs and reduced safety issues or inadequatly induced immune-responses. In this study, we investigated the antibody responses induced by heterologous prime-boost with vaccines based on mRNA and virus-like particles (VLPs). The VLP-based mCuMVTT-RBM vaccine candidate and the approved mRNA-1273 vaccine were used for this purpose. We find that homologous prime boost regimens with either mRNA or VLP induced high levels of high avidity antibodies. Optimal antibody responses were, however, induced by heterologous regimens both for priming with mRNA and boosting with VLP and vice versa, priming with VLP and boosting with mRNA. Thus, heterologous prime boost strategies may be able to optimize efficacy and economics of novel vaccine strategies.

COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , RNA, Messenger/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 61(10): 3912-3918, 2022 10 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20242590


OBJECTIVES: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) treated with the anti-CD20 mAb rituximab (RTX) have been identified as high-risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. Additionally, there is increased risk due to reduced humoral immune response, induced by therapeutic B cell depletion. This study sought to quantify humoral response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with IRD treated with RTX. It also sought to elucidate the influence of the time frame between the last RTX dose and the first vaccination, or the status of B cell depletion on antibody titre. METHODS: In this case-control study, patients with IRDs previously treated with RTX were examined for humoral immune response after completing the first series of vaccinations with approved vaccines [BNT162b2 (Biontech/Pfizer), RNA-1273 (Moderna), AZD1222 (AstraZeneca/Oxford), Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson)]. Antibody levels were quantified using the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 QuantiVac ELISA (EI-S1-IgG-quant). Blood samples were taken just before the next infusion with RTX after the vaccination. The interval between the last RTX infusion and the first vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and other possible factors influencing the antibody levels were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were included. Of these, 65 (64%) showed a negative antibody level (<24 IU (international unit)/ml) after the vaccination. The comparative univariate analysis of the antibody levels achieved a significant result (P = 0.0008) for the time between the last RTX infusion and first vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. No CD19+ peripheral B-cells could be detected in 73 of the patients (72%). CONCLUSION: The study confirms the negative impact of RTX on antibody level after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. A clear relationship exists between the antibody titre and the interval between the last RTX infusion and the first vaccination, the number of peripheral B-cells, and immunoglobulin quantity. Improved understanding of the effect of these parameters can help guide synchronization of vaccination in relation to the RTX therapy regimen.

COVID-19 , Rheumatic Diseases , Ad26COVS1 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Case-Control Studies , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , RNA , Rheumatic Diseases/chemically induced , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Rituximab/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
Cien Saude Colet ; 26(5): 1885-1898, 2021 May.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20243734


This article explores the use of spatial artificial intelligence to estimate the resources needed to implement Brazil's COVID-19 immu nization campaign. Using secondary data, we conducted a cross-sectional ecological study adop ting a time-series design. The unit of analysis was Brazil's primary care centers (PCCs). A four-step analysis was performed to estimate the popula tion in PCC catchment areas using artificial in telligence algorithms and satellite imagery. We also assessed internet access in each PCC and con ducted a space-time cluster analysis of trends in cases of SARS linked to COVID-19 at municipal level. Around 18% of Brazil's elderly population live more than 4 kilometer from a vaccination point. A total of 4,790 municipalities showed an upward trend in SARS cases. The number of PCCs located more than 5 kilometer from cell towers was largest in the North and Northeast regions. Innovative stra tegies are needed to address the challenges posed by the implementation of the country's National COVID-19 Vaccination Plan. The use of spatial artificial intelligence-based methodologies can help improve the country's COVID-19 response.

O objetivo deste artigo é analisar o uso da inteligência artificial espacial no contexto da imunização contra COVID-19 para a seleção adequada dos recursos necessários. Trata-se de estudo ecológico de caráter transversal baseado em uma abordagem espaço-temporal utilizando dados secundários, em Unidades Básicas de Saúde do Brasil. Foram adotados quatro passos analíticos para atribuir um volume de população por unidade básica, aplicando algoritmos de inteligência artificial a imagens de satélite. Em paralelo, as condições de acesso à internet móvel e o mapeamento de tendências espaço-temporais de casos graves de COVID-19 foram utilizados para caracterizar cada município do país. Cerca de 18% da população idosa brasileira está a mais de 4 quilômetros de distância de uma sala de vacina. No total, 4.790 municípios apresentaram tendência de agudização de casos de Síndrome Respiratória Aguda Grave. As regiões Norte e Nordeste apresentaram o maior número de Unidades Básicas de Saúde com mais de 5 quilômetros de distância de antenas de celular. O Plano nacional de vacinação requer o uso de estratégias inovadoras para contornar os desafios do país. O uso de metodologias baseadas em inteligência artificial espacial pode contribuir para melhoria do planejamento das ações de resposta à COVID-19.

COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , Artificial Intelligence , Brazil , Cities , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Intelligence , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
Blood Cancer Discov ; 2(1): 13-18, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20238332


Cancer vaccine development has been historically fraught with difficulty, but tremendous progress has been made over the past 5 years. In this In Focus article, we reflect on the progress and challenges with vaccine development for cancers in general and for hematologic malignancies in particular, and suggest how our cancer vaccine experience can offer insight into COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 , Cancer Vaccines , Neoplasms , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Neoplasms/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccine Development
Cien Saude Colet ; 26(11): 5599-5614, 2021 Nov.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237516


The evaluation of vaccine effectiveness is conducted with real-world data. They are essential to monitor the performance of vaccination programmes over time, and in the context of the emergence of new variants. Until now, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines has been assessed based on classic methods, such as cohort and test-negative case-control studies, which may often not allow for adequate control of inherent biases in the assignment of vaccination campaigns. The aim of this review was to discuss the study designs available to evaluate vaccine effectiveness, highlighting quasi-experimental studies, which seek to mimic randomized trials, by introducing an exogenous component to allocate to treatment, in addition to the advantages, limitations, and applicability in the context of Brazilian data. The use of quasi-experimental approaches, such as interrupted time series, difference-in-differences, propensity scores, instrumental variables, and regression discontinuity design, are relevant due to the possibility of providing more accurate estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. This is especially important in scenarios such as the Brazilian, which characterized by the use of various vaccines, with the respective numbers and intervals between doses, applied to different age groups, and introduced at different times during the pandemic.

A avalição da efetividade de vacinas é feita com dados do mundo real e é essencial para monitorar o desempenho dos programas de vacinação ao longo do tempo bem como frente a novas variantes. Até o momento, a avaliação da efetividade das vacinas para COVID-19 tem sido baseada em métodos clássicos como estudos de coorte e caso controle teste-negativo, que muitas vezes podem não permitir o adequado controle dos vieses intrínsecos da alocação das campanhas de vacinação. O objetivo dessa revisão foi discutir os desenhos de estudo disponíveis para avaliação de efetividade das vacinas, enfatizando os estudos quase-experimentais, que buscam mimetizar os estudos aleatorizados ao introduzir um componente exógeno para atribuição ao tratamento, bem como suas vantagens, limitações e aplicabilidade no contexto dos dados brasileiros. O emprego de métodos quase-experimentais, incluindo as séries temporais interrompidas, o método de diferença em diferenças, escore de propensão, variáveis instrumentais e regressão descontínua, são relevantes pela possibilidade de gerar estimativas mais acuradas da efetividade de vacinas para COVID-19 em cenários como o brasileiro, que se caracteriza pelo uso de várias vacinas, com respectivos número e intervalos entre doses, aplicadas em diferentes faixas etárias e em diferentes momentos da pandemia.

COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
Bol. micol. (Valparaiso En linea) ; 37(1): 9-18, jun. 2022. tab
Article in Spanish | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-20235149


Existen múltiples reportes de manifestaciones persistentes en pacientes que cursaron infecciones por SARS-CoV-2, independiente de su gravedad, configurando el síndrome de COVID-19 prolongado. No existe una definición consensuada de este síndrome, cuya patogenia pareciera ser multifactorial. Considerando las más de 500 millones de infecciones en todo el mundo, este síndrome pudiese incidir en una insospechada y prolongada carga sobre los sistemas sanitarios. Reportes recientes han asociado a la vacunación con esquema primario completo como una asociación protectora para el desarrollo de COVID-19 prolongado, transformándose en otro beneficio poblacional asociado a las vacunas.(AU)

There are multiple reports of persistent manifestations in patients who had SARS-CoV-2 infections, regardless of their severity, configuring the prolonged COVID-19 syndrome. There is no agreed definition of this syndrome whose pathogenesis seems to be multifactorial. Considering the more than 500 million infections worldwide, this syndrome could have an unsuspected and prolonged burden on health systems . Recent reports have associated vaccination with a complete primary schedule as a protective association with the development of prolonged COVID-19, becoming another population benefit associated with vaccines.(AU)

Humans , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome/complications , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome/physiopathology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome/classification
Med.lab ; 26(4): 319-322, 2022.
Article in Spanish | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-20234904


Entre finales de 2019 y mediados de 2022, la pandemia de COVID-19 ha causado más de 600 millones de casos confirmados y al menos 6,5 millones de muertes, constituyendo la emergencia de salud pública más importante de las últimas décadas. En paralelo con el transcurso de la pandemia, ha tenido lugar una carrera sin precedentes por la obtención de vacunas eficaces para el control de la rápida dispersión del virus. Cuatro meses después del anuncio de la emergencia del SARS-CoV-2, agente de la pandemia, ya habían 115 "vacunas candidatas", cinco de ellas en fase de ensayos clínicos [1]. Al mismo tiempo, una gran revolución en la producción de vacunas estaba ocurriendo; nuevas tecnologías de producción de biológicos, más eficaces y más rápidas, llevaron al desarrollo de vacunas útiles en un tiempo increíblemente corto. Antes de la pandemia, el desarrollo de una nueva vacuna típicamente solía tomar entre cinco y diez años, pero en 2020, a menos de un año de haberse declarado la pandemia, ya se habían publicado ensayos clínicos que demostraban la eficacia de varias vacunas producidas mediante tecnologías novedosas [2]. Son numerosas las vacunas contra el SARS-CoV-2 que han sido autorizadas para su uso. A la fecha, más de 12 mil millones de dosis de vacunas han sido administradas en el mundo [3]. Se estima que tres dosis de vacunas pueden evitar hasta en un 94 % el riesgo de uso de ventilación mecánica y muerte [4], así mismo, estudios demuestran que el riesgo de mortalidad por COVID-19 en los no vacunados es 25 veces mayor que en los vacunados

Humans , COVID-19 , Recombinant Proteins , RNA, Messenger , Disease Vectors , COVID-19 Vaccines
Cien Saude Colet ; 27(3): 951-956, 2022 Mar.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239042


This paper reflects on the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 in Brazil in light of the consideration of scientific evidence in the decision-making process. Brazil has one of the largest and most complete vaccination programs in the world, the National Immunization Program (Programa Nacional de Imunizações or PNI). Unfortunately, in the current context, with the political interference of the federal government, the PNI lost its role in conducting the vaccination campaign against COVID-19. Despite being a vaccination campaign with a lot of potential and one of the most accepted by the population among countries in the world, it presented many problems and left several gaps in the Brazilian scenario. In this sense, it is essential that the quality scientific evidence produced during this period can guide a constant remodeling of the vaccination strategy. Four points deserve to be highlighted: 1) the interval between doses; 2) the interchangeability between vaccines; 3) vaccination in children and adolescentes; and 4) the need for better evidence to define the vaccination strategy in certain groups and age groups.

O presente texto trata de refletir sobre a campanha de vacinação contra COVID-19 no Brasil à luz da consideração das evidências científicas no processo de tomada de decisão. O Brasil possui um dos maiores e mais completos programas de vacinação do mundo, o Programa Nacional de Imunizações (PNI). Infelizmente, no contexto atual, com as interferências políticas do governo federal, o PNI perdeu seu protagonismo na condução da campanha de vacinação contra a COVID-19. Apesar de ser uma campanha de vacinação com muito potencial e uma das mais aceitas pela população entre os países no mundo, apresentou muitos problemas e deixou diversas lacunas no cenário brasileiro. Nesse sentido, é fundamental que as evidências científicas de qualidade produzidas nesse período possam guiar uma remodelagem constante da estratégia de vacinação. Quatro pontos merecem ser destacados: 1) o intervalo entre as doses; 2) a intercambialidade entre vacinas; 3) a vacinação em adolescentes; e 4) a necessidade de melhores evidências para definir a estratégia de vacinação em certos grupos e faixas etárias.

COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Child , Humans , Immunization Programs
Infect Dis Now ; 52(8S): S7-S8, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20238432


Heterologous prime boost vaccination is a primary vaccination with different vaccines, most often from different vaccine platforms. It combines the immunological properties of the different vaccines and thereby induces humoral, cellular and, in some cases, mucosal response. For Covid prevention, it has been used in primary vaccination, due to safety issues and in boosters. We have evaluated some articles reporting on the results of this type of vaccine, and demonstrating its usefulness.

COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization, Secondary/methods , Vaccination/methods
West J Emerg Med ; 23(4): 570-578, 2022 Jul 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237020


INTRODUCTION: Unvaccinated emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are at increased risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and potentially transmitting the virus to their families, coworkers, and patients. Effective vaccines for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus exist; however, vaccination rates among EMS professionals remain largely unknown. Consequently, we sought to document vaccination rates of EMS professionals and identify predictors of vaccination uptake. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of North Carolina EMS professionals after the COVID-19 vaccines were widely available. The survey assessed vaccination status as well as beliefs regarding COVID-19 illness and vaccine effectiveness. Prediction of vaccine uptake was modeled using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 860 EMS professionals completed the survey, of whom 74.7% reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Most respondents believed that COVID-19 is a serious threat to the population, that they are personally at higher risk of infection, that vaccine side effects are outweighed by illness prevention, and the vaccine is safe and effective. Despite this, only 18.7% supported mandatory vaccination for EMS professionals. Statistically significant differences were observed between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness, recall of employer vaccine recommendation, perceived risk of infection, degree of threat to the population, and trust in government to take actions to limit the spread of disease. Unvaccinated respondents cited reasons such as belief in personal health and natural immunity as protectors against infection, concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness, inadequate vaccine knowledge, and lack of an employer mandate for declining the vaccine. Predictors of vaccination included belief in vaccine safety (odds ratio [OR] 5.5, P=<0.001) and effectiveness (OR 4.6, P=<0.001); importance of vaccination to protect patients (OR 15.5, P=<0.001); perceived personal risk of infection (OR 1.8, P=0.04); previous receipt of influenza vaccine (OR 2.5, P=0.003); and sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision about vaccination (OR 2.4, P=0.024). CONCLUSION: In this survey of EMS professionals, over a quarter remained unvaccinated for COVID-19. Given the identified predictors of vaccine acceptance, EMS systems should focus on countering misinformation through employee educational campaigns as well as on developing policies regarding workforce immunization requirements.

COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Health Personnel , Vaccination , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Surveys , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , North Carolina , Occupational Health , Patient Safety , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudence , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
Cien Saude Colet ; 27(11): 4213, 2022 Nov.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235504


The article aims to identify who the "Doctors for Life" are, their academic and professional information, which assumptions have been mobilized for the defense of "early treatment" and the denial of vaccines for COVID-19, and the representativeness of their discourses in the medical practice context in Brazil. The analysis is based on a list of 276 doctors' names, cataloged from their website, and on academic and professional information obtained through research on the Federal Medical Conseil website and the Scientific and Technological Development Nacional Council platform. The content analysis points to the centrality of the medical specialties of homeopathy and acupuncture in the population of Doctors for Life when compared to the set of specialist doctors in Brazil. The significant accession of homeopaths and acupuncturists to the Doctors for Life movement can clarify the understanding of specific medical rationalities, allowing us to distinguish which categories and ideas about the health-disease process are in dispute. It is concluded that, more than describing the problem, it is needed to establish its correlations with a group of events, practices, political decisions, economic linkages, shared beliefs, and a chain of processes that configure its undeniably social characteristics.

O artigo pretende identificar quem são os "Médicos pela Vida" (MPV), suas informações acadêmicas e profissionais, quais as premissas utilizadas para a defesa do "tratamento precoce" e da negação das vacinas contra COVID-19 e qual a representatividade de seus discursos no contexto da prática médica no Brasil. A análise baseia-se na lista de 276 profissionais médicos catalogados no site dos MPV e em informações acadêmicas e profissionais coletadas nos sites do Conselho Federal de Medicina e da Plataforma Lattes, do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. A análise do conteúdo aponta para a centralidade das especialidades da Homeopatia e Acupuntura na população de MPV quando comparada ao conjunto dos especialistas do Brasil. A adesão significativa de homeopatas e acupunturistas ao movimento dos MPV pode iluminar a compreensão sobre racionalidades médicas específicas, permitindo distinguir quais categorias e ideias acerca dos processos de saúde e doença estão em disputa. Conclui-se que, para além de descrever a problemática, é preciso estabelecer suas correlações com um conjunto de acontecimentos, práticas, decisões políticas, encadeamentos econômicos, compartilhamento de crenças e uma corrente de processos que configuram seu caráter inegavelmente social.

COVID-19 , Humans , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Pandemics/prevention & control , Vaccination
Eur Heart J ; 44(24): 2234-2243, 2023 06 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234164


AIMS: A comprehensive nationwide study on the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis (VRM) is in need. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 44 276 704 individuals with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccination, the incidence and clinical courses of VRM cases confirmed by the Expert Adjudication Committee of the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency were analyzed. COVID-19 VRM was confirmed in 480 cases (1.08 cases per 100 000 persons). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was significantly higher in men than in women (1.35 vs. 0.82 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001) and in mRNA vaccines than in other vaccines (1.46 vs. 0.14 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was highest in males between the ages of 12 and 17 years (5.29 cases per 100 000 persons) and lowest in females over 70 years (0.16 cases per 100 000 persons). Severe VRM was identified in 95 cases (19.8% of total VRM, 0.22 per 100 000 vaccinated persons), 85 intensive care unit admission (17.7%), 36 fulminant myocarditis (7.5%), 21 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (4.4%), 21 deaths (4.4%), and 1 heart transplantation (0.2%). Eight out of 21 deaths were sudden cardiac death (SCD) attributable to VRM proved by an autopsy, and all cases of SCD attributable to VRM were aged under 45 years and received mRNA vaccines. CONCLUSION: Although COVID-19 VRM was rare and showed relatively favorable clinical courses, severe VRM was found in 19.8% of all VRM cases. Moreover, SCD should be closely monitored as a potentially fatal complication of COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Myocarditis , Adolescent , Aged , Child , Female , Humans , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Death, Sudden, Cardiac , mRNA Vaccines , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , Vaccination/adverse effects