RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), led to a global pandemic from 2020. In Thailand, five waves of outbreaks were recorded, with the fourth and fifth waves driven by the Delta and Omicron variants, resulting in over 20,000 new confirmed cases daily at their peaks. METHODS: This cross-sectional study investigated the associations between clinical symptoms, vaccination status, antibody responses, and post-COVID-19 sequelae in COVID-19 patients. Plasma samples and clinical data were collected from participants admitted to hospitals in Thailand between July 2021 and August 2022, with follow-ups conducted for one year. The study included 110 participants infected with either the Delta (n = 46) or Omicron (n = 64) variants. Virus genotypes were confirmed by RT-PCR of nasal swab RNA and partial nucleotide sequencing of the S gene. IgG and IgA antibody levels against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants were measured in plasma samples using ELISA. RESULTS: Pneumonia was found to be associated with Delta variant infections, while sore throat, congestion or runny nose, and headache were linked to Omicron infections. Vaccination with fewer than two doses and diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with higher disease severity. Specific IgG and IgA antibodies against the RBD of the Delta variant generally rose by day 14 and were maintained for up to two months, whereas the pattern of antibody response to the Omicron variant was less clear. Antibody risings were found to be positively associated with pneumonia, certain underlying conditions (obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus), and age ≥ 60 years. Delta variant infections were associated with forgetfulness, hair loss, and headache during the 1-year post-infection period. Females were more likely to experience hair loss, forgetfulness, and joint pain, while older age was associated with joint pain. CONCLUSIONS: This study enhances our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Thais, particularly concerning the Delta and Omicron variants. The findings can inform public health planning and response strategies for future outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 or other emerging viral diseases.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/inmunología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Transversales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Tailandia/epidemiología , Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Estudios de Seguimiento , Vacunación , Anciano , Inmunoglobulina G/sangre , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Inmunoglobulina A/sangre , Adulto Joven , Formación de AnticuerposRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite a significant declined in malaria incidence in Thailand, the rising global travel has resulted in an increase of imported malaria cases, posing a threat to the goal of malaria elimination. This study aims to understand the epidemiological trends and clinical outcomes of imported malaria cases in Thailand. METHODS: Medical records of all imported malaria cases admitted from 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2022 at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Thailand, were retrospectively examined. Demographic data, travel details, severity of illness, and clinical outcomes were described. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with severe disease outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 335 cases of imported malaria were identified, with 33 % classified as transnational malaria and 67 % as border malaria. Transnational malaria cases (79 % P. falciparum) were mostly acquired from Sub-Saharan Africa for business or visiting friends and relatives (VFRs). Border malaria cases (81 % P. vivax) involved unskilled labourers and were acquired from land-border countries. The proportion of imported malaria in business travelers increased from 13 % to 50 % over the ten years. Risk factors for severe imported malaria included male gender, age 40 and older, infection with P. falciparum, and acquired malaria from Africa. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding unique demographic and socioeconomic characteristics in both border and transnational cases is crucial for effective malaria prevention. The increasing imported malaria among business travelers highlight the need for targeted prevention in this high-risk group.
RESUMEN
Background: Dengue is a prevalent cause of acute febrile illness, predominantly in Asia, where it necessitates supportive care without the need for antibiotics. This study aimed to evaluate antibiotic usage and analyze hospitalization costs among adults infected with the dengue virus. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Thailand, in 2022. Two independent reviewers assessed all adult cases with confirmed dengue from 2016 to 2021. Determinants of inappropriateness were analyzed using Poisson regression. Results: The study included 249 participants with over half presenting with severe dengue or dengue with warning signs upon admission. The cumulative incidence of antibiotic use was 9.3% (95% CI, 8.23-10.47), predominantly involving empirical treatment strategies. Ceftriaxone and doxycycline were the most frequently prescribed antibiotics. Notably, patients who received empirical antibiotics showed no definite or presumed bacterial infections. Among those who received definite strategies, inappropriate durations, including both short treatments and the overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics, were observed. A private ward admission was identified as a significant predictor of inappropriate use, with an incidence rate ratio of 4.15 (95% CI, 1.16-14.82) compared with intensive care unit admission. Direct medical costs did not differ significantly between appropriate and inappropriate uses. Conclusions: The incidence of antibiotic use among dengue cases was moderate; however, inappropriate use by indication was observed. Antimicrobial stewardship strategies should be encouraged, particularly in patients with dengue with warning signs admitted to a general or private ward. Direct medical costs between appropriate and inappropriate use were comparable.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Inactivated whole-virus vaccination elicits immune responses to both SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins, like natural infections. A heterologous Ad26.COV2.S booster given at two different intervals after primary BBIBP-CorV vaccination was safe and immunogenic at days 28 and 84, with higher immune responses observed after the longer pre-boost interval. We describe booster-specific and hybrid immune responses over 1 year. METHODS: This open-label phase 1/2 study was conducted in healthy Thai adults aged ≥ 18 years who had completed primary BBIBP-CorV primary vaccination between 90-240 (Arm A1; n = 361) or 45-75 days (Arm A2; n = 104) before enrolment. All received an Ad26.COV2.S booster. We measured anti-S and anti-N IgG antibodies by Elecsys®, neutralizing antibodies by SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assay, and T-cell responses by quantitative interferon (IFN)-γ release assay. Immune responses were evaluated in the baseline-seronegative population (pre-booster anti-N < 1.4 U/mL; n = 241) that included the booster-effect subgroup (anti-N < 1.4 U/mL at each visit) and the hybrid-immunity subgroup (anti-N ≥ 1.4 U/mL and/or SARS-CoV-2 infection, irrespective of receiving non-study COVID-19 boosters). RESULTS: In Arm A1 of the booster-effect subgroup, anti-S GMCs were 131-fold higher than baseline at day 336; neutralizing responses against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 were 5-fold higher than baseline at day 168; 4-fold against Omicron BA.2 at day 84. IFN-γ remained approximately 4-fold higher than baseline at days 168 and 336 in 18-59-year-olds. Booster-specific responses trended lower in Arm A2. In the hybrid-immunity subgroup at day 336, anti-S GMCs in A1 were 517-fold higher than baseline; neutralizing responses against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.2 were 28- and 31-fold higher, respectively, and IFN-γ was approximately 14-fold higher in 18-59-year-olds at day 336. Durable immune responses trended lower in ≥ 60-year-olds. CONCLUSION: A heterologous Ad26.COV2.S booster after primary BBIBP-CorV vaccination induced booster-specific immune responses detectable up to 1 year that were higher in participants with hybrid immunity. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05109559.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Inmunización Secundaria , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven , Ad26COVS1/inmunología , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/sangre , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/inmunología , Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Anticuerpos Antivirales/inmunología , Proteínas de la Nucleocápside de Coronavirus/inmunología , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Estudios de Seguimiento , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal , Inmunoglobulina G/sangre , Inmunoglobulina G/inmunología , Interferón gamma/inmunología , Fosfoproteínas/inmunología , Glicoproteína de la Espiga del Coronavirus/inmunología , Linfocitos T/inmunología , Tailandia , Vacunas de Productos Inactivados/inmunología , Vacunas de Productos Inactivados/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Effective antiviral drugs prevent hospitalisation and death from COVID-19. Antiviral efficacy can be efficiently assessed in vivo by measuring rates of SARS-CoV-2 clearance estimated from serial viral genome densities quantitated in nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab eluates. We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of unblinded arms in the PLATCOV platform trial to characterise changes in viral clearance kinetics and infer optimal design and interpretation of antiviral pharmacometric evaluations. METHODS: Serial viral density data were analysed from symptomatic, previously healthy, adult patients (within 4 days of symptom onset) enrolled in a large multicentre, randomised, adaptive, pharmacodynamic, platform trial (PLATCOV) comparing antiviral interventions for SARS-CoV-2. Viral clearance rates over 1 week were estimated under a hierarchical Bayesian linear model with B-splines used to characterise temporal changes in enrolment viral densities and clearance rates. Bootstrap re-sampling was used to assess the optimal duration of follow-up for pharmacometric assessment, where optimal was defined as maximising the expected Z score when comparing effective antivirals with no treatment. PLATCOV is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05041907. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2021, and Oct 20, 2023, 1262 patients were randomly assigned in the PLATCOV trial. Unblinded data were available from 800 patients (who provided 16â818 oropharyngeal viral quantitative PCR [qPCR] measurements), of whom 504 (63%) were female. 783 (98%) patients had received at least one vaccine dose and 703 (88%) were fully vaccinated. SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was biphasic (bi-exponential). The first phase (α) was accelerated by effective interventions. For all the effective interventions studied, maximum discriminative power (maximum expected Z score) was obtained when evaluating serial data from the first 5 days after enrolment. Over the 2-year period studied, median viral clearance half-lives estimated over 7 days shortened from 16·6 h (IQR 15·3 to 18·2) in September, 2021, to 9·2 h (8·0 to 10·6) in October, 2023, in patients receiving no antiviral drugs, equivalent to a relative reduction of 44% (95% credible interval [CrI] 19 to 64). A parallel reduction in viral clearance half-lives over time was observed in patients receiving antiviral drugs. For example, in the 158 patients assigned to ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (3380 qPCR measurements), the median viral clearance half-life reduced from 6·4 h (IQR 5·7 to 7·3) in June, 2022, to 4·8 h (4·2 to 5·5) in October, 2023, a relative reduction of 26% (95% CrI -4 to 42). INTERPRETATION: SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance kinetics in symptomatic, vaccinated individuals accelerated substantially over 2 years of the pandemic, necessitating a change to how new SARS-CoV-2 antivirals are compared (ie, shortening the period of pharmacodynamic assessment). As of writing (October, 2023), antiviral efficacy in COVID-19 can be efficiently assessed in vivo using serial qPCRs from duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily for 5 days after drug administration. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.
Asunto(s)
Antivirales , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/farmacocinética , Antivirales/farmacología , Teorema de Bayes , COVID-19/virología , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Carga Viral/efectos de los fármacosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Inactivated vaccines were delivered to low- and middle-income countries during the early pandemics of COVID-19. Currently, more than 10 inactivated COVID-19 vaccines have been developed. Most inactivated vaccines contain an inactivated whole-cell index SARS-CoV-2 strain that is adjuvant. Whole virions inactivated with aluminum hydroxide vaccines were among the most commonly used. However, with the emerging of COVID-19 variants and waning of the immunity of two doses of after 3 months, WHO and many local governments have recommended the booster-dose program especially with heterologous platform vaccine. AREA COVERED: This review was conducted through a literature search of the MEDLINE database to identify articles published from 2020 to 2023 covered the inactivated COVID-19 vaccines primary series with homologous and heterologous booster focusing on safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, and effectiveness. EXPERT OPINION: The inactivated vaccines, especially whole virion inactivated in aluminum hydroxide appeared to be safe and had good priming effects. Immune responses generated after one dose of heterologous boost were high and able to preventing severity of disease and symptomatic infection. A new approach to inactivated vaccine has been developed using inactivating recombinant vector virus-NDV-HXP-S vaccine.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Hidróxido de Aluminio , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas de Productos Inactivados/efectos adversos , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Inmunogenicidad VacunalRESUMEN
In early symptomatic COVID-19 treatment, high dose oral favipiravir did not accelerate viral clearance. BACKGROUND: Favipiravir, an anti-influenza drug, has in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Clinical trial evidence to date is inconclusive. Favipiravir has been recommended for the treatment of COVID-19 in some countries. METHODS: In a multicentre open-label, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomised to one of ten treatment arms including high dose oral favipiravir (3.6g on day 0 followed by 1.6g daily to complete 7 days treatment) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of viral clearance (derived under a linear mixed-effects model from the daily log10 viral densities in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over 8 days [18 swabs per patient]), assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population (mITT). The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of the allocated intervention. This ongoing adaptive platform trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907) on 13/09/2021. RESULTS: In the final analysis, the mITT population contained data from 114 patients randomised to favipiravir and 126 patients randomised concurrently to no study drug. Under the linear mixed-effects model fitted to all oropharyngeal viral density estimates in the first 8 days from randomisation (4,318 swabs), there was no difference in the rate of viral clearance between patients given favipiravir and patients receiving no study drug; a -1% (95% credible interval: -14 to 14%) difference. High dose favipiravir was well-tolerated. INTERPRETATION: Favipiravir does not accelerate viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. The viral clearance rate estimated from quantitative measurements of oropharyngeal eluate viral densities assesses the antiviral efficacy of drugs in vivo with comparatively few studied patients.
Asunto(s)
Amidas , COVID-19 , Pirazinas , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Resultado del Tratamiento , Antivirales/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir are the two leading oral COVID-19 antiviral treatments, but their antiviral activities in patients have not been compared directly. The aim of this ongoing platform trial is to compare different antiviral treatments using the rate of viral clearance as the measure of antiviral effect. METHODS: PLATCOV is an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive pharmacometric platform trial running in Thailand, Brazil, Pakistan, and Laos. The component of the trial reported here was conducted in the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. We recruited low-risk adult patients aged 18-50 years with early symptomatic COVID-19 (<4 days of symptoms). Eligible patients were randomly assigned using block randomisation via a centralised web app to one of seven treatment groups: molnupiravir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, casirivimab-imdevimab, tixagevimab-cilgavimab, favipiravir, fluoxetine, or no study drug. The no study drug group comprised a minimum proportion of 20% of patients at all times, with uniform randomisation ratios applied across the active treatment groups. Results for the concurrently randomised molnupiravir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, and no study drug groups are reported here. The primary endpoint was the rate of oropharyngeal viral clearance assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population, defined as patients with more than 2 days of follow-up. Safety was assessed in all participants who took at least one dose of the medication. The viral clearance rate was derived under a Bayesian hierarchical linear model fitted to the log10 viral densities in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over 1 week (18 measurements). Treatment groups with a probability of more than 0·9 that viral clearance was accelerated by more than 20% compared with no drug entered a non-inferiority comparison (with a 10% non-inferiority margin) compared with the platform's current most effective drug. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05041907. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2022, and Feb 23, 2023, 209 patients in Thailand were enrolled and concurrently randomly assigned to molnupiravir (n=65), ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (n=59), or no study drug (n=85). 129 (62%) of the patients were female and 80 (38%) were male. Relative to the no study drug group, the rates of viral clearance were 37% (95% credible interval 16-65) faster with molnupiravir and 84% (54-119) faster with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. In the non-inferiority comparison, viral clearance was 25% (10-38) slower with molnupiravir than ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. Molnupiravir was removed from the study platform when it reached the prespecified inferiority margin of 10% compared with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. Median estimated viral clearance half-lives were 8·5 h (IQR 6·7-10·1) with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, 11·6 h (8·6-15·4) with molnupiravir, and 15·5 h (11·9-21·2) with no study drug. Viral rebound occurred more frequently following nirmatrelvir (six [10%] of 58) compared with the no study drug (one [1%] of 84; p=0·018) or the molnupiravir (one [2%] of 65; p=0·051) groups. Persistent infections following molnupiravir had more viral mutations (three of nine patients had an increased number of single nucleotide polymorphisms in samples collected at 7 or more days compared with those at baseline) than after nirmatrelvir (zero of three) or no study drug (zero of 19). There were no adverse events of grade 3 or worse, or serious adverse events in any of the reported treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Both molnupiravir and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir accelerate oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance in patients with COVID-19, but the antiviral effect of ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir was substantially greater. Measurement of oropharyngeal viral clearance rates provides a rapid and well tolerated approach to the assessment and comparison of antiviral drugs in patients with COVID-19. It should be evaluated in other acute viral respiratory infections. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , COVID-19 , Infecciones por VIH , VIH-1 , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Ritonavir , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Teorema de Bayes , Resultado del Tratamiento , SARS-CoV-2 , Tailandia , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/farmacologíaRESUMEN
Introduction: This study aims to assess the economic impact of introducing the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) and 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) to Thai older adult aged ≥ 65 years who are healthy or with chronic health conditions and immunocompromised conditions from a societal perspective in order to introduce the vaccine to Thailand's National Immunization Program for the older adult. Methods: A Markov model was adopted to simulate the natural history and economic outcomes of invasive pneumococcal diseases using updated published sources and Thai databases. We reported analyses as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) in USD per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. In addition, sensitivity analyses and budget impact analyses were conducted. Results: The base-case analysis of all interventions (no vaccinations [current standard of care in Thailand], PPSV23, and PCV13) showed that PPSV23 was extendedly dominated by PCV13. Among healthy individuals or those with chronic health conditions, ICER for PCV13 was 233.63 USD/QALY; meanwhile, among individuals with immunocompromised conditions, ICER for PCV13 was 627.24 USD/QALY. PCV13 are economical vaccine for all older adult Thai individuals when compared to all interventions. Conclusions: In the context of Thailand, PCV13 is recommended as the best buy and should be primarily prioritized when both costs and benefits are considered. Also, this model will be beneficial to the two-next generation pneumococcal vaccines implementation in Thailand.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas Neumococicas , Neumonía Neumocócica , Anciano , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Análisis de Costo-Efectividad , Vacunas Neumococicas/economía , Vacunas Neumococicas/uso terapéutico , Neumonía Neumocócica/prevención & control , Pueblos del Sudeste Asiático , Tailandia , Vacunas ConjugadasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Uncertainty over the therapeutic benefit of parenteral remdesivir in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in varying treatment guidelines. METHODS: In a multicenter open-label, controlled, adaptive, pharmacometric platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to 1 of 8 treatment arms including intravenous remdesivir (200 mg followed by 100 mg daily for 5 days) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) clearance (estimated under a linear model fit to the daily log10 viral densities, days 0-7) in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates, in a modified intention-to-treat population. This ongoing adaptive trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907). RESULTS: The 2 study arms enrolled 131 patients (remdesivir n = 67, no study drug n = 64) and estimated viral clearance rates from a median of 18 swab samples per patient (a total of 2356 quantitative polymerase chain reactions). Under the linear model, compared with the contemporaneous control arm (no study drug), remdesivir accelerated mean estimated viral clearance by 42% (95% credible interval, 18%-73%). CONCLUSIONS: Parenteral remdesivir accelerates viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric assessment of therapeutics using the method described can determine in vivo clinical antiviral efficacy rapidly and efficiently.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Resultado del Tratamiento , AntiviralesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The inactivated COVID-19 whole-virus vaccine BBIBP-CorV has been extensively used worldwide. Heterologous boosting after primary vaccination can induce higher immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 than homologous boosting. The safety and immunogenicity after 28 days of a single Ad26.COV2.S booster dose given at different intervals after 2 doses of BBIBP-CorV are presented. METHODS: This open-label phase 1/2 trial was conducted in healthy adults in Thailand who had completed 2-dose primary vaccination with BBIBP-CorV. Participants received a single booster dose of Ad26.COV2.S (5 × 1010 virus particles) 90-240 days (Group A1; n = 360) or 45-75 days (Group A2; n = 66) after the second BBIBP-CorV dose. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed over 28 days. Binding IgG antibodies to the full-length pre-fusion Spike and anti-nucleocapsid proteins of SARS-CoV-2 were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assay and live virus microneutralization assay were used to quantify the neutralizing activity of antibodies against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan-Hu-1) and the delta (B.1.617.2) and omicron (B.1.1.529/BA.1 and BA.2) variants. The cell-mediated immune response was measured using a quantitative interferon (IFN)-γ release assay in whole blood. RESULTS: Solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs) on days 0-7 were mostly mild, as were unsolicited vaccine-related AEs during days 0-28, with no serious AEs. On day 28, anti-Spike binding antibodies increased from baseline by 487- and 146-fold in Groups A1 and A2, and neutralizing antibodies against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 by 55- and 37-fold, respectively. Humoral responses were strongest against ancestral SARS-CoV-2, followed by the delta, then the omicron BA.2 and BA.1 variants. T-cell-produced interferon-γ increased approximately 10-fold in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A single heterologous Ad26.COV2.S booster dose after two BBIBP-CorV doses was well tolerated and induced robust humoral and cell-mediated immune responses measured at day 28 in both interval groups. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05109559.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Ad26COVS1 , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Inmunogenicidad VacunalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Streptococcus pneumoniae carriage is a prerequisite for clinical infections and is used to make public health decisions on vaccine licensure. Pneumococcal carriage data among high-risk Thai adults are needed before national vaccine program introduction. The association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pneumococcal carriage were also investigated. METHODS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted among high-risk Thai adults from September 2021 to November 2022. Pneumococcal carriage and serotypes were investigated using both conventional and molecular methods. Demographics and co-morbidities were determined for carriage while accounting for case clustering from various study sites. RESULTS: A total of 370 individuals were enrolled. The prevalence of pneumococcal carriage, as determined by the molecular method, was 30.8 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): 26.1-35.8), while after excluding non-typeable pneumococci from the oropharyngeal sample, the carriage prevalence was 20.8 % (95 % CI: 16.79-25.31). The serotype coverage rates by pneumococcal vaccine were 12.3 %, 13.1 %, and 16.4 % for PCV13, PCV15 or PCV20, and PPSV23, respectively, while the non-vaccine type was the majority (45.1 %). The most common serotype was 19B/C (35.5 %), followed by 6 A/B/C/D (10.7 %). The age group under 65 years was associated with a higher pneumococcal carriage rate than the age group 85 and older (odds ratio (OR): 5.01, 95 % CI: 1.75-14.36). There was no significant difference between SARS-CoV-2 and carriage status. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of pneumococcal carriage in Thais was high. The majority of serotypes were not covered by the vaccine. Further studies on the link between carriage serotypes and disease are required. The magnitude and serotype distribution of carriage were comparable in the SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative groups.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Infecciones Neumocócicas , Humanos , Adulto , Lactante , Anciano , Streptococcus pneumoniae , Infecciones Neumocócicas/epidemiología , Infecciones Neumocócicas/prevención & control , Pandemias , Estudios Transversales , Nasofaringe , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Portador Sano/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas Neumococicas , Vacunación , SerogrupoRESUMEN
COVID-19 patients occasionally present with diarrhoea. Our objective was to estimate the risk of developing the severe disease in COVID-19 patients with and without diarrhoea and to provide a more precise estimate of the prevalence of COVID-19-associated digestive symptoms. A total of 88 studies (n = 67,794) on patients with a COVID-19 infection published between 1 January 2020 and 20 October 2022 were included in this meta-analysis. The overall prevalence of digestive symptoms was 27% (95% confidence interval (CI): 21-34%; I2 = 99%). According to our data, the pooled prevalence of diarrhoea symptoms in the 88 studies analysed was 17% (95% CI: 14-20%; I2 = 98%). The pooled estimate of nausea or vomiting in a total of 60 studies was 12% (95% CI: 8-15%; I2 = 98%). We also analysed 23 studies with eligible individuals (n = 3800) to assess the association between the disease severity and diarrhoea. Individuals who had diarrhoea were more likely to have experienced severe COVID-19 (odds ratio: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.31-2.24; p < 0.0001; I2 = 10%). Gastrointestinal symptoms and diarrhoea are frequently presenting COVID-19 manifestations that physicians should be aware of.
RESUMEN
Dengue infection has been a public health problem worldwide, especially in tropical areas. A lack of sensitive diagnostic methods in the early phase of the illness is one of the challenging problems in clinical practices. We, herein, analyzed 86 sera of acute febrile patients, from both dengue and non-dengue febrile illness, to study the diagnostic performance of dengue diagnostics. When compared with detection by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), dengue NS1 detection by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) had the highest sensitivity of 82.4% (with 94.3% specificity), while NS1 by rapid diagnostic test (RDT) had 76.5% sensitivity. IgM detection by ELISA and RDT showed only 27.5% and 17.9% sensitivity, respectively. The combination of NS1 and IgM in RDT yielded a sensitivity of 78.4%, with 97.1% specificity. One of the essential steps in making a diagnosis from patient samples is the preparation process. At present, a variety of techniques have been used to increase the number of analytes in clinical samples. In this study, we focused on the sample concentration method. The sera were concentrated three times with the ultrafiltration method using a 10 kDa molecular weight cut-off membrane. The results showed an increase in the sensitivity of RDT-NS1 detection at 80.4%, with 100% specificity. When combining NS1 and IgM detection, the concentration method granted RDT an 82.4% sensitivity, with 100% specificity. In conclusion, serum concentration by the ultrafiltration method is a simple and applicable technique. It could increase the diagnostic performance of point-of-care dengue diagnostics.
RESUMEN
Background: There is no generally accepted methodology for in vivo assessment of antiviral activity in SARS-CoV-2 infections. Ivermectin has been recommended widely as a treatment of COVID-19, but whether it has clinically significant antiviral activity in vivo is uncertain. Methods: In a multicentre open label, randomized, controlled adaptive platform trial, adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to one of six treatment arms including high-dose oral ivermectin (600 µg/kg daily for 7 days), the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab (600 mg/600 mg), and no study drug. The primary outcome was the comparison of viral clearance rates in the modified intention-to-treat population. This was derived from daily log10 viral densities in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates. This ongoing trial is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT05041907). Results: Randomization to the ivermectin arm was stopped after enrolling 205 patients into all arms, as the prespecified futility threshold was reached. Following ivermectin, the mean estimated rate of SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was 9.1% slower (95% confidence interval [CI] -27.2% to +11.8%; n=45) than in the no drug arm (n=41), whereas in a preliminary analysis of the casirivimab/imdevimab arm it was 52.3% faster (95% CI +7.0% to +115.1%; n=10 (Delta variant) vs. n=41). Conclusions: High-dose ivermectin did not have measurable antiviral activity in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric evaluation of viral clearance rate from frequent serial oropharyngeal qPCR viral density estimates is a highly efficient and well-tolerated method of assessing SARS-CoV-2 antiviral therapeutics in vitro. Funding: 'Finding treatments for COVID-19: A phase 2 multi-centre adaptive platform trial to assess antiviral pharmacodynamics in early symptomatic COVID-19 (PLAT-COV)' is supported by the Wellcome Trust Grant ref: 223195/Z/21/Z through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator. Clinical trial number: NCT05041907.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Ivermectina/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
The humoral immune response plays a key role in protecting the population from SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Patients who recovered from COVID-19 as well as fully vaccinated individuals have elevated levels of antibodies. The dynamic levels of the classes and subclasses of antibody responses to new variants that occur in different populations remain unclear. We prospectively recruited 60 participants, including COVID-19 patients and CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals, in Thailand from May to August 2021. Plasma samples were collected on day 0, day 14, and day 28 to determine the dynamic levels of the classes and subclasses of plasma antibodies against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in the spike protein (S) of four SARS-CoV-2 strains (Wuhan, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron) via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Our results indicated that the patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections had broader class and subclass profiles as well as higher levels of anti-S RBD antibodies to the Wuhan, Alpha, and Delta strains than did the CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals. The median antibody levels increased and subsequently declined in a month in the COVID-19 patients and in the vaccinated group. Correlations of the classes and subclasses of antibodies were observed in the COVID-19 patients but not in the vaccinated individuals. The levels of all of the anti-S RBD antibodies against the Omicron variant were low in the patients and in the vaccinated individuals. Our study revealed distinct antibody profiles between the two cohorts, suggesting different pathways of immune activation. This could have an impact on protection from infections by new variants of concern (VOC). IMPORTANCE The antibody responses to new SARS-CoV-2 variants that occur in different populations remain unclear. In this study, we recruited 60 participants, including COVID-19 patients and CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals, in Thailand and determined the dynamic levels of the IgG, IgA, IgM, and IgG subclasses of antibodies against the spike protein (S) of four SARS-CoV-2 strains. Our results showed that the patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections had broader profiles and higher levels of antibodies to the Wuhan, Alpha, and Delta strains than did the CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals. The antibody levels of both groups increased and subsequently decreased within 1 month. Higher and functional correlations of these antibodies were observed in the COVID-19 patients. The levels of all anti-S RBD antibodies against the Omicron variant were low in patients and vaccinated individuals. Our study revealed distinct antibody responses between the two groups, suggesting different pathways of immune response, which may have an impact on protection from infections by new SARS-CoV-2 variants.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Formación de Anticuerpos , Tailandia , Glicoproteína de la Espiga del Coronavirus , Inmunoglobulina G , VacunaciónRESUMEN
Strongyloidiasis is a disease caused by Strongyloides stercoralis and remains a neglected tropical infection despite significant public health concerns. Challenges in the management of strongyloidiasis arise from wide ranging clinical presentations, lack of practical high sensitivity diagnostic tests, and a fatal outcome in immunocompromised hosts. Migration, globalization, and increased administration of immunomodulators, particularly during the COVID-19 era, have amplified the global impact of strongyloidiasis. Here, we comprehensively review the diagnostic tests, clinical manifestations, and treatment of strongyloidiasis. The review additionally focuses on complicated strongyloidiasis in immunocompromised patients and critical screening strategies. Diagnosis of strongyloidiasis is challenging because of non-specific presentations and low parasite load. In contrast, treatment is simple: administration of single dosage ivermectin or moxidectin, a recent anthelmintic drug. Undiagnosed infections result in hyperinfection syndrome and disseminated disease when patients become immunocompromised. Thus, disease manifestation awareness among clinicians is crucial. Furthermore, active surveillance and advanced diagnostic tests are essential for fundamental management.
RESUMEN
Acute undifferentiated febrile illness (AUFI) is the presenting symptom of various tropical and infectious diseases. Viral infection is generally the most common cause of AUFI, accounting for 8-11.8% of cases; thus, antibiotics might be unnecessary. Dengue and malaria are common tropical infectious diseases requiring effective supportive treatment and antimalarial agents, respectively. The uncertainty of early diagnosis results in widespread empirical antimicrobial treatment in high -income as well as in low-and middle-income countries. Although rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been shown to limit antibiotic prescriptions in dengue and malaria, we observed a wide range of antibiotic prescriptions for 13-92.7% of cases in previous literature, particularly in RDT-negative malaria cases. Given several RDT limitations, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) appears to be an effective strategy for controlling unnecessary antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) prevention. This program should be endorsed by a multidisciplinary team in tropical diseases to control collateral damage of inappropriate antimicrobial use. Empirical antibiotic treatment should be administered based on clinical judgement, microbiological evidence, and local epidemiological data. Rapid termination of antibiotic therapy, including disease control or elimination, is the mainstay of AMS in tropical diseases. Local and international sectors should implement an AMS programme to reduce AMR in the Tropics.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Co-infection of influenza A and B has been reported, especially in outbreak situations, but epidemiological and clinical information is limited. We aimed to investigate an outbreak of influenza among health care workers in which the index case suffered from influenza A and B co-infection. METHODOLOGY: We investigated the outbreak setting through the utilization of structural questionnaires, molecular methods, and serological tests. RESULTS: Among 13 persons, one index case and five confirmed secondary cases were confirmed. The overall influenza infection rate was 46.2% (6/13), with infection rates for influenza A and B at 38.5% (5/13) and 23.1% (3/13), respectively. Interestingly, one of the secondary cases had influenza A and B co-infection identical to the index case. There was no significant association between vaccination status and influenza infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study unveils the demonstration of human-to-human influenza A and B co-infection transmission for the first time. Surveillance systems, combined with epidemiological case investigation comprising molecular diagnosis, should be strengthened for future influenza outbreak preparedness.