The Impact of Biologic Therapies on Rate of Colectomy in Paediatric-onset Ulcerative Colitis - A Population-Based Cohort Study.

AIM: Biologic therapies have been associated with reduced rate of colectomy in ulcerative colitis (UC) in adults, but data are limited in paediatric-onset UC. Our aim was to define the rate of colectomy in paediatric-onset UC, including post-transition into adult care, and to evaluate the impact of biologic therapies on rate of colectomy. METHOD: All prevalent patients diagnosed with paediatric-onset UC in South-East Scotland were identified from a prospectively accrued database at our regional tertiary centre. Patients exposed to biologics or surgery were identified and further data collected from health records. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate cumulative risk of colectomy over time. RESULTS: 145 prevalent patients were identified between 2000 and 2021. Median follow-up was 7.9 years (IQR 4.1-13.1). 23 patients (16 %) underwent a colectomy. 50/145 (34 %) patients received biologic therapy, and 13/23 (57 %) patients who underwent colectomy received biologics. The cumulative risk of colectomy across the whole cohort at 1, 5, and 10 years was 3 %, 13 % and 16 %, respectively. Patients exposed to biologics had a higher colectomy rate at 5 and 10 years (22 % and 34 %). Patients in the pre-biologic era (2000-2008) had non-significantly reduced time from diagnosis to colectomy (2.4 vs 3.7 years, p = 0.204). CONCLUSION: We have defined the 1-, 5-, and 10-year colectomy rate in a population-based cohort of Paediatric-onset UC patients. Patients who received biologic therapy had a significantly increased risk of colectomy. Increased severity of disease in these patients may account for the greater colectomy risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1.

Analysis of Severe Illness After Postvaccination COVID-19 Breakthrough Among Adults With and Without HIV in the US.

Importance: Understanding the severity of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 (ie, COVID-19) breakthrough illness among people with HIV (PWH) can inform vaccine guidelines and risk-reduction recommendations. Objective: To estimate the rate and risk of severe breakthrough illness among vaccinated PWH and people without HIV (PWoH) who experience a breakthrough infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, the Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET-II) collaboration included adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV who were receiving care and were fully vaccinated by June 30, 2021, along with PWoH matched according to date fully vaccinated, age group, race, ethnicity, and sex from 4 US integrated health systems and academic centers. Those with postvaccination COVID-19 breakthrough before December 31, 2021, were eligible. Exposures: HIV infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was severe COVID-19 breakthrough illness, defined as hospitalization within 28 days after a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection with a primary or secondary COVID-19 discharge diagnosis. Discrete time proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs of severe breakthrough illness within 28 days of breakthrough COVID-19 by HIV status adjusting for demographic variables, COVID-19 vaccine type, and clinical factors. The proportion of patients who received mechanical ventilation or died was compared by HIV status. Results: Among 3649 patients with breakthrough COVID-19 (1241 PWH and 2408 PWoH), most were aged 55 years or older (2182 patients [59.8%]) and male (3244 patients [88.9%]). The cumulative incidence of severe illness in the first 28 days was low and comparable between PWoH and PWH (7.3% vs 6.7%; risk difference, -0.67%; 95% CI, -2.58% to 1.23%). The risk of severe breakthrough illness was 59% higher in PWH with CD4 cell counts less than 350 cells/µL compared with PWoH (aHR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.46; P = .049). In multivariable analyses among PWH, being female, older, having a cancer diagnosis, and lower CD4 cell count were associated with increased risk of severe breakthrough illness, whereas previous COVID-19 was associated with reduced risk. Among 249 hospitalized patients, 24 (9.6%) were mechanically ventilated and 20 (8.0%) died, with no difference by HIV status. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the risk of severe COVID-19 breakthrough illness within 28 days of a breakthrough infection was low among vaccinated PWH and PWoH. PWH with moderate or severe immune suppression had a higher risk of severe breakthrough infection and should be included in groups prioritized for additional vaccine doses and risk-reduction strategies.

Analysis of Postvaccination Breakthrough COVID-19 Infections Among Adults With HIV in the United States.

Importance: Recommendations for additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines for people with HIV (PWH) are restricted to those with advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk after vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines. Objective: To estimate the rate and risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated PWH and people without HIV (PWoH) in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II (of the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design [NA-ACCORD], which is part of the International Epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS [IeDEA]), collaboration of 4 prospective, electronic health record-based cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Adult PWH who were fully vaccinated prior to June 30, 2021, were matched with PWoH on date of full vaccination, age, race and ethnicity, and sex and followed up through December 31, 2021. Exposures: HIV infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: COVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after a patient was fully vaccinated. Results: Among 113 994 patients (33 029 PWH and 80 965 PWoH), most were 55 years or older (80 017 [70%]) and male (104 967 [92%]); 47 098 (41%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 43 218 (38%) were non-Hispanic White. The rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH vs PWoH (55 [95% CI, 52-58] cases per 1000 person-years vs 43 [95% CI, 42-45] cases per 1000 person-years). Cumulative incidence of breakthroughs 9 months after full vaccination was low (3.8% [95% CI, 3.7%-3.9%]), albeit higher in PWH vs PWoH (4.4% vs 3.5%; log-rank P < .001; risk difference, 0.9% [95% CI, 0.6%-1.2%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 28% higher in PWH vs PWoH (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.19-1.37]). Among PWH, younger age (<45 y vs 45-54 y), history of COVID-19, and not receiving an additional dose (aHR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.58-0.88]) were associated with increased risk of breakthrough infections. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression, but high CD4 count (ie, ≥500 cells/mm3) was associated with fewer breakthroughs among PWH. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, COVID-19 vaccination, especially with an additional dose, was effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through December 31, 2021. PWH had an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared with PWoH. Expansion of recommendations for additional vaccine doses to all PWH should be considered.

The Regulation of the Complementary Health Sector: General Public's Knowledge of Complementary Medicine-Related Quality Assurance and Consumer Protection.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicine (CM) use is a ubiquitous aspect of an increasingly consumer-driven model of healthcare delivery and plays an increasingly prominent role in the Australian health sector. Yet there is limited empirical research investigating the quality and integrity of protections for consumers in Australia. The aim of this study is to help address this gap in knowledge by exploring how members of the public engage with protection mechanisms related to CM use. METHODS: This study utilised a cross-sectional online survey to recruit a sample of 1132 Australian adults aged 18 and over. Purposive convenience sampling was used to recruit participants from an existing database of Australian adults who had expressed interest in participating in research. RESULTS: The majority of the participants (64.0%) had visited a CM practitioner in their lifetime. However, a minority of participants (36.9%) indicated they would feel confident in knowing where to complain if something went wrong with the treatment they received from a CM practitioner. Most participants (74.7%) had used a CM product in their lifetime. Specifically, 32.3% had 'ever' used an herbal product and 69.9% had 'ever' used a nutritional supplement. However, a minority of participants (32.7%) indicated they would feel confident knowing where to complain if something went wrong with a herbal or nutritional supplement they used. Most participants indicated a lack of knowledge about how CM practitioners and CM products are regulated in Australia. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study clearly highlight a concerning lack of knowledge by CM patients and consumers regarding the regulation of CM in Australia. From a policy perspective, it is necessary to seek proactive approaches that target complaint-related knowledge of the CM patients and consumers through education and advocacy efforts.

COVID-19 infections post-vaccination by HIV status in the United States.

IMPORTANCE: Recommendations for additional doses of COVID vaccine are restricted to people with HIV who have advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk post-vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines. OBJECTIVE: Estimate the risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated people with (PWH) and without (PWoH) HIV in the US. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II cohort collaboration consists of 4 longitudinal cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Each cohort identified individuals ≥18 years old, in-care, and fully vaccinated for COVID-19 through 30 June 2021. PWH were matched to PWoH on date fully vaccinated, age group, race/ethnicity, and sex at birth. Incidence rates per 1,000 person-years and cumulative incidence of breakthrough infections with 95% confidence intervals ([,]) were estimated by HIV status. Cox proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of breakthrough infections by HIV status adjusting for demographic factors, prior COVID-19 illness, vaccine type (BNT162b2, [Pfizer], mRNA-1273 [Moderna], Jansen Ad26.COV2.S [J&J]), calendar time, and cohort. Risk factors for breakthroughs among PWH, were also investigated. EXPOSURE: HIV infection. OUTCOME: COVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after an individual was fully vaccinated. RESULTS: Among 109,599 individuals (31,840 PWH and 77,759 PWoH), the rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH versus PWoH: 44 [41, 48] vs. 31 [29, 33] per 1,000 person-years. Cumulative incidence at 210 days after date fully vaccinated was low, albeit higher in PWH versus PWoH overall (2.8% versus 2.1%, log-rank p<0.001, risk difference=0.7% [0.4%, 1.0%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 41% higher in PWH versus PWoH (aHR=1.41 [1.28, 1.56]). Among PWH, younger age (18-24 versus 45-54), history of COVID-19 prior to fully vaccinated date, and J&J vaccination (versus Pfizer) were associated with increased risk of breakthroughs. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression or CD4 count among PWH. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: COVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through 30 Sept 2021. PWH have an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared to PWoH. Recommendations for additional vaccine doses should be expanded to all PWH.

"CAM-creep": medical practitioners, professional discipline and integrative medicine.

This article examines the problem of applying disciplinary standards to the practice of integrative medicine. The article examines the structure of the National Law and discusses examples of when medical practitioners have been found to have breached professional standards because of their use of complementary and alternative medicine. The article argues there is a danger in medical practitioners who move away from the principles of evidence-based practice and informed consent in their adoption of integrative medicine. The authors posit a concept of "CAM-creep", situations where practitioners abandon medical professional standards in favour of ones from complementary and alternative medicine.

Jabs and barbs: ways to address misleading vaccination and immunisation information using currently available strategies.

Misleading vaccination information undermines confidence in vaccination and may lead to reductions in the effectiveness of vaccination programs. A number of regulatory techniques can be employed to challenge the spread of false information, including health care complaints, therapeutic goods laws, consumer protection laws and professional discipline. This article examines three case studies involving the publication of anti-vaccination information by non-professionally aligned organisations, by non-registered health professionals, and by registered health professionals under the National Law. The article examines the effectiveness of different regulatory responses and makes suggestions for future strategies to deal with the publication of demonstrably false information regarding vaccination.

Medical merchants: conflict of interest, office product sales and notifiable conduct.

Professional ethical codes identify the issue of conflict of interest, which can distort doctors' objective judgements concerning the best interests of patients. Legal fiduciary duties may be owed by doctors to patients in situations of potential conflict of interest. Prescribing and dispensing functions have been largely legally separated to prevent conflicts of interest arising. The advent of integrative medicine has been accompanied by an apparent growth of in-house selling of therapeutic products. Medical merchandising constitutes a prima-facie conflict of interest and may amount to notifiable conduct under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law provisions. We believe that doctors who sell therapeutic products should adhere to strict conditions to avoid significantly departing from accepted professional standards. Doctors who have a reasonable belief that a colleague is failing to comply with these conditions could consider notifying the Medical Board of Australia.