RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is a common cause of morbidity and mortality, yet a causative pathogen is identified in a minority of cases. Plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing may improve diagnostic yield in immunocompromised patients with pneumonia. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, observational study of immunocompromised adults undergoing bronchoscopy to establish a pneumonia etiology, plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing was compared to standardized usual care testing. Pneumonia etiology was adjudicated by a blinded independent committee. The primary outcome, additive diagnostic value, was assessed in the Per Protocol population (patients with complete testing results and no major protocol deviations) and defined as the percent of patients with an etiology of pneumonia exclusively identified by plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing. Clinical additive diagnostic value was assessed in the Per Protocol subgroup with negative usual care testing. RESULTS: Of 257 patients, 173 met Per Protocol criteria. A pneumonia etiology was identified by usual care in 52/173 (30.1%), plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing in 49/173 (28.3%) and the combination of both in 73/173 (42.2%) patients. Plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing exclusively identified an etiology of pneumonia in 21/173 patients (additive diagnostic value 12.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.7% to 18.0%, P < .001). In the Per Protocol subgroup with negative usual care testing, plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing identified a pneumonia etiology in 21/121 patients (clinical additive diagnostic value 17.4%, 95% CI, 11.1% to 25.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive plasma microbial cell-free DNA sequencing significantly increased diagnostic yield in immunocompromised patients with pneumonia undergoing bronchoscopy and extensive microbiologic and molecular testing. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04047719.
Asunto(s)
Neumonía , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Neumonía/etiología , Análisis de Secuencia de ADN , Huésped InmunocomprometidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to develop with emerging variants, expanding population-level immunity, and advances in clinical care. We describe changes in the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19 hospitalizations and risk factors for critical outcomes over time. METHODS: We included adults aged ≥18 years from 10 states hospitalized with COVID-19 June 2021-March 2023. We evaluated changes in demographics, clinical characteristics, and critical outcomes (intensive care unit admission and/or death) and evaluated critical outcomes risk factors (risk ratios [RRs]), stratified by COVID-19 vaccination status. RESULTS: A total of 60 488 COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were included in the analysis. Among those hospitalized, median age increased from 60 to 75 years, proportion vaccinated increased from 18.2% to 70.1%, and critical outcomes declined from 24.8% to 19.4% (all P < .001) between the Delta (June-December, 2021) and post-BA.4/BA.5 (September 2022-March 2023) periods. Hospitalization events with critical outcomes had a higher proportion of ≥4 categories of medical condition categories assessed (32.8%) compared to all hospitalizations (23.0%). Critical outcome risk factors were similar for unvaccinated and vaccinated populations; presence of ≥4 medical condition categories was most strongly associated with risk of critical outcomes regardless of vaccine status (unvaccinated: adjusted RR, 2.27 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.14-2.41]; vaccinated: adjusted RR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.56-1.92]) across periods. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who experienced critical outcomes decreased with time, and median patient age increased with time. Multimorbidity was most strongly associated with critical outcomes.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Inmunidad Colectiva , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. METHODS: We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19-like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients' vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. RESULTS: The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Ad26COVS1 , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
In September 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended updated 2023-2024 (monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months to prevent COVID-19, including severe disease. As with past COVID-19 vaccines, additional doses may be considered for persons with immunocompromising conditions, who are at higher risk for severe COVID-19 and might have decreased response to vaccination. In this analysis, vaccine effectiveness (VE) of an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was evaluated during September 2023-February 2024 using data from the VISION VE network. Among adults aged ≥18 years with immunocompromising conditions, VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 38% in the 7-59 days after receipt of an updated vaccine dose and 34% in the 60-119 days after receipt of an updated dose. Few persons (18%) in this high-risk study population had received updated COVID-19 vaccine. All persons aged ≥6 months should receive updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination; persons with immunocompromising conditions may get additional updated COVID-19 vaccine doses ≥2 months after the last recommended COVID-19 vaccine.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Adolescente , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
In September 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended updated 2023-2024 (monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months to prevent COVID-19, including severe disease. However, few estimates of updated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended illness are available. This analysis evaluated VE of an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during September 2023-January 2024 using a test-negative, case-control design with data from two CDC VE networks. VE against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 51% (95% CI = 47%-54%) during the first 7-59 days after an updated dose and 39% (95% CI = 33%-45%) during the 60-119 days after an updated dose. VE estimates against COVID-19-associated hospitalization from two CDC VE networks were 52% (95% CI = 47%-57%) and 43% (95% CI = 27%-56%), with a median interval from updated dose of 42 and 47 days, respectively. Updated COVID-19 vaccine provided increased protection against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults. These results support CDC recommendations for updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination. All persons aged ≥6 months should receive updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Comités Consultivos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, August 2021-March 2022. METHODS: We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19-like illness and positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation. RESULTS: We included 27 149 SARS-CoV-2-positive hospitalizations. During both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR, 0.52 [95% CI, .28-.96]; Omicron OR, 0.69 [95% CI, .54-.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients but ORs overlapped across vaccination strata. We observed SHR >1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Adolescente , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure risk and access to healthcare are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE. METHODS: We used electronic health record data from 7 health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis. RESULTS: In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vulnerabilidad Social , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Cobertura de Vacunación , Eficacia de las VacunasRESUMEN
On June 19, 2022, the original monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were approved as a primary series for children aged 6 months-4 years (Pfizer-BioNTech) and 6 months-5 years (Moderna) based on safety, immunobridging, and limited efficacy data from clinical trials. On December 9, 2022, CDC expanded recommendations for use of updated bivalent vaccines to children aged ≥6 months. mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against emergency department or urgent care (ED/UC) encounters was evaluated within the VISION Network during July 4, 2022-June 17, 2023, among children with COVID-19-like illness aged 6 months-5 years. Among children aged 6 months-5 years who received molecular SARS-CoV-2 testing during August 1, 2022-June 17, 2023, VE of 2 monovalent Moderna doses against ED/UC encounters was 29% (95% CI = 12%-42%) ≥14 days after dose 2 (median = 100 days after dose 2; IQR = 63-155 days). Among children aged 6 months-4 years with a COVID-19-like illness who received molecular testing during September 19, 2022-June 17, 2023, VE of 3 monovalent Pfizer-BioNTech doses was 43% (95% CI = 17%-61%) ≥14 days after dose 3 (median = 75 days after dose 3; IQR = 40-139 days). Effectiveness of ≥1 bivalent dose, comparing children with at least a complete primary series and ≥1 bivalent dose to unvaccinated children, irrespective of vaccine manufacturer, was 80% (95% CI = 42%-96%) among children aged 6 months-5 years a median of 58 days (IQR = 32-83 days) after the dose. All children should stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccines, including initiation of COVID-19 vaccination immediately when they are eligible.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Niño , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Vacunas Combinadas , Prueba de COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , ARN Mensajero , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
Persons with moderate-to-severe immunocompromising conditions might have reduced protection after COVID-19 vaccination, compared with persons without immunocompromising conditions (1-3). On August 13, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that adults with immunocompromising conditions receive an expanded primary series of 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. ACIP followed with recommendations on September 23, 2021, for a fourth (booster) dose and on September 1, 2022, for a new bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, containing components of the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant (4). Data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of monovalent COVID-19 vaccines among persons with immunocompromising conditions since the emergence of the Omicron variant in December 2021 are limited. In the multistate VISION Network,§ monovalent 2-, 3-, and 4-dose mRNA VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization were estimated among adults with immunocompromising conditions¶ hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness,** using a test-negative design comparing odds of previous vaccination among persons with a positive or negative molecular test result (case-patients and control-patients) for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). During December 16, 2021-August 20, 2022, among SARS-CoV-2 test-positive case-patients, 1,815 (36.3%), 1,387 (27.7%), 1,552 (31.0%), and 251 (5.0%) received 0, 2, 3, and 4 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses, respectively. Among test-negative control-patients during this period, 6,928 (23.7%), 7,411 (25.4%), 12,734 (43.6%), and 2,142 (7.3%) received these respective doses. Overall, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization among adults with immunocompromising conditions hospitalized for COVID-like illness during Omicron predominance was 36% ≥14 days after dose 2, 69% 7-89 days after dose 3, and 44% ≥90 days after dose 3. Restricting the analysis to later periods when Omicron sublineages BA.2/BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 were predominant and 3-dose recipients were eligible to receive a fourth dose, VE was 32% ≥90 days after dose 3 and 43% ≥7 days after dose 4. Protection offered by vaccination among persons with immunocompromising conditions during Omicron predominance was moderate even after a 3-dose monovalent primary series or booster dose. Given the incomplete protection against hospitalization afforded by monovalent COVID-19 vaccines, persons with immunocompromising conditions might benefit from updated bivalent vaccine booster doses that target recently circulating Omicron sublineages, in line with ACIP recommendations. Further, additional protective recommendations for persons with immunocompromising conditions, including the use of prophylactic antibody therapy, early access to and use of antivirals, and enhanced nonpharmaceutical interventions such as well-fitting masks or respirators, should also be considered.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Antivirales , Hospitalización , Vacunas Combinadas , ARN Mensajero , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
The Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was first identified in the United States in November 2021, with the BA.1 sublineage (including BA.1.1) causing the largest surge in COVID-19 cases to date. Omicron sublineages BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 emerged later and by late April 2022, accounted for most cases.* Estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) can be reduced by newly emerging variants or sublineages that evade vaccine-induced immunity (1), protection from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated persons (2), or increasing time since vaccination (3). Real-world data comparing VE during the periods when the BA.1 and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominated (BA.1 period and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period, respectively) are limited. The VISION network examined 214,487 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and 58,782 hospitalizations with a COVID-19-like illness§ diagnosis among 10 states during December 18, 2021-June 10, 2022, to evaluate VE of 2, 3, and 4 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) compared with no vaccination among adults without immunocompromising conditions. VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization 7-119 days and ≥120 days after receipt of dose 3 was 92% (95% CI = 91%-93%) and 85% (95% CI = 81%-89%), respectively, during the BA.1 period, compared with 69% (95% CI = 58%-76%) and 52% (95% CI = 44%-59%), respectively, during the BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period. Patterns were similar for ED/UC encounters. Among adults aged ≥50 years, VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization ≥120 days after receipt of dose 3 was 55% (95% CI = 46%-62%) and ≥7 days (median = 27 days) after a fourth dose was 80% (95% CI = 71%-85%) during BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominance. Immunocompetent persons should receive recommended COVID-19 booster doses to prevent moderate to severe COVID-19, including a first booster dose for all eligible persons and second booster dose for adults aged ≥50 years at least 4 months after an initial booster dose. Booster doses should be obtained immediately when persons become eligible.¶.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunas Sintéticas , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Adolescente , Adulto , Atención Ambulatoria , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitalización , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas Sintéticas , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.
Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacunas de ARNm/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
The efficacy of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 exceeded 90% in clinical trials that included children and adolescents aged 5-11, 12-15, and 16-17 years (1-3). Limited real-world data on 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) have also indicated high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization (4-6); however, data on VE against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and duration of protection are limited. Pfizer-BioNTech VE data are not available for children aged 5-11 years. In partnership with CDC, the VISION Network* examined 39,217 emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and 1,699 hospitalizations among persons aged 5-17 years with COVID-19-like illness across 10 states during April 9, 2021-January 29, 2022,§ to estimate VE using a case-control test-negative design. Among children aged 5-11 years, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters 14-67 days after dose 2 (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) was 46%. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 83% and 76%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 38% and 46%, respectively. Among adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE increased to 86% ≥7 days after dose 3 (booster dose). VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was substantially lower during the Omicron predominant period than the B.1.617.2 (Delta) predominant period among adolescents aged 12-17 years, with no significant protection ≥150 days after dose 2 during Omicron predominance. However, in adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE during the Omicron predominant period increased to 81% ≥7 days after a third booster dose. During the full study period, including pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron predominant periods, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization among children aged 5-11 years was 74% 14-67 days after dose 2, with wide CIs that included zero. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 92% and 94%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 73% and 88%, respectively. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster dose for those aged 12-17 years.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna BNT162/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Eficacia de las Vacunas/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Niño , Preescolar , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria , Masculino , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose. A third dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine increases neutralizing antibody levels (4), and three recent studies from Israel have shown improved effectiveness of a third dose in preventing COVID-19 associated with infections with the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (5-7). Yet, data are limited on the real-world effectiveness of third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the United States, especially since the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in mid-December 2021. The VISION Network§ examined VE by analyzing 222,772 encounters from 383 emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care (UC) clinics and 87,904 hospitalizations from 259 hospitals among adults aged ≥18 years across 10 states from August 26, 2021¶ to January 5, 2022. Analyses were stratified by the period before and after the Omicron variant became the predominant strain (>50% of sequenced viruses) at each study site. During the period of Delta predominance across study sites in the United States (August-mid-December 2021), VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was 86% 14-179 days after dose 2, 76% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. Estimates of VE for the same intervals after vaccination during Omicron variant predominance were 52%, 38%, and 82%, respectively. During the period of Delta variant predominance, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was 90% 14-179 days after dose 2, 81% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. During Omicron variant predominance, VE estimates for the same intervals after vaccination were 81%, 57%, and 90%, respectively. The highest estimates of VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters or hospitalizations during both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods were among adults who received a third dose of mRNA vaccine. All unvaccinated persons should get vaccinated as soon as possible. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines during their primary COVID-19 vaccination series should receive a third dose when eligible, and eligible persons should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , Inmunización Secundaria , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Eficacia de las Vacunas/estadística & datos numéricos , Vacunas de ARNm/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/terapia , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Laboratorios , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Vacunas Sintéticas/administración & dosificación , Vacunas Sintéticas/inmunología , Adulto Joven , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vancomycin is the most commonly administered antibiotic in hospitalized patients, but optimal exposure targets remain controversial. To clarify the therapeutic exposure range, this study evaluated the association between vancomycin exposure and outcomes in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter (n = 14), observational study of 265 hospitalized adults with MRSA bacteremia treated with vancomycin. The primary outcome was treatment failure (TF), defined as 30-day mortality or persistent bacteremia ≥7 days. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury (AKI). The study was powered to compare TF between patients who achieved or did not achieve day 2 area under the curve to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) thresholds previously found to be associated with lower incidences of TF. The thresholds, analyzed separately as co-primary endpoints, were AUC/MIC by broth microdilution ≥650 and AUC/MIC by Etest ≥320. RESULTS: Treatment failure and AKI occurred in 18% and 26% of patients, respectively. Achievement of the prespecified day 2 AUC/MIC thresholds was not associated with less TF. Alternative day 2 AUC/MIC thresholds associated with lower TF risks were not identified. A relationship between the day 2 AUC and AKI was observed. Patients with day 2 AUC ≤515 experienced the best global outcomes (no TF and no AKI). CONCLUSIONS: Higher vancomycin exposures did not confer a lower TF risk but were associated with more AKI. The findings suggest that vancomycin dosing should be guided by the AUC and day 2 AUCs should be ≤515. As few patients had day 2 AUCs <400, further study is needed to define the lower bound of the therapeutic range.
Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina , Infecciones Estafilocócicas , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vancomicina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
We present a case of Cryptococcus neoformans pericarditis in a cardiac transplant recipient. This article reviews the diagnosis, treatment, and complications of cryptococcosis specifically in transplant patients. While pericarditis is a rare manifestation of Cryptococcus infection, this case highlights that cryptococcosis should be considered in the differential diagnosis for solid organ transplant and immunocompromised patients presenting with pericardial effusions.
Asunto(s)
Criptococosis/diagnóstico , Cryptococcus neoformans/aislamiento & purificación , Trasplante de Corazón/efectos adversos , Pericarditis/diagnóstico , Adulto , Anciano , Antifúngicos/uso terapéutico , Criptococosis/microbiología , Criptococosis/terapia , Ecocardiografía/métodos , Femenino , Fluconazol/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trasplante de Órganos/efectos adversos , Pericardiocentesis/métodos , Pericarditis/microbiología , Pericarditis/terapia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Consumption of hypercaloric diets leads to increase of free fatty acids (FFA), pro-inflammatory cytokines and production of oxygen and nitrogen reactive species. These alterations induce oxidative and nitrosative stress causing dysfunction of tissues and consequently the development of chronic diseases. Therefore, it is important to decrease oxidative stress and thus preventing the development of these diseases. Strawberry has a lot of Vitamin C and polyphenols, compounds with excellent antioxidant properties, which may be an option for reducing oxidative stress and therefore to prevent the development of some diseases. Studies conducted in vitro in animal models and clinical studies support that this fruit can be a good alternative to reduce oxidative stress and thus reducing and/or preventing the development of diseases in humans.
El consumo de dietas hipercalóricas conlleva al aumento de ácidos grasos libres (AGL), citocinas proinflamatorias y producción de especies reactivas de oxígeno y de nitrógeno. Estas alteraciones inducen estrés oxidativo y nitrosativo que daña a los tejidos causando disfunción de los mismos y en consecuencia se pueden desarrollar enfermedades crónicas. Por lo tanto, es importante disminuir el estrés oxidativo y con ello prevenir el desarrollo de estas enfermedades. La fresa es un fruto rico en vitamina C y polifenoles, compuestos con excelentes propiedades antioxidantes, por lo que puede ser una opción para la disminución del estrés oxidativo y por lo tanto, para prevenir el desarrollo de algunas enfermedades. Los estudios realizados in vitro, en modelos animales y estudios clínicos sustentan que la fresa puede ser una buena alternativa para disminuir el estrés oxidativo y así atenuar y/o prevenir el desarrollo de enfermedades en el humano.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crónica/prevención & control , Fragaria , Estrés Oxidativo/efectos de los fármacos , Fitoterapia , Polifenoles/farmacología , Animales , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Ingestión de Energía , HumanosRESUMEN
IMPORTANCE: Clostridium difficile is the most common cause of health care-associated infection in US hospitals. Recurrence occurs in 25% to 30% of patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety, fecal colonization, recurrence rate, and optimal dosing schedule of nontoxigenic C. difficile strain M3 (VP20621; NTCD-M3) for prevention of recurrent C. difficile infection (CDI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study conducted from June 2011 to June 2013 among 173 patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed as having CDI (first episode or first recurrence) and had successfully completed treatment with metronidazole, oral vancomycin, or both at 44 study centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 4 treatments: oral liquid formulation of NTCD-M3, 10(4) spores/d for 7 days (n = 43), 10(7) spores/d for 7 days (n = 44), or 10(7) spores/d for 14 days (n = 42), or placebo for 14 days (n = 44). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was safety and tolerability of NTCD-M3 within 7 days of treatment. Exploratory secondary outcomes included fecal colonization with NTCD-M3 from end of study drug through week 6 and CDI recurrence from day 1 through week 6. RESULTS: Among 168 patients who started treatment, 157 completed treatment. One or more treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 78% of patients receiving NTCD-M3 and 86% of patients receiving placebo. Diarrhea and abdominal pain were reported in 46% and 17% of patients receiving NTCD-M3 and 60% and 33% of placebo patients, respectively. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 7% of patients receiving placebo and 3% of all patients who received NTCD-M3. Headache was reported in 10% of patients receiving NTCD-M3 and 2% of placebo patients. Fecal colonization occurred in 69% of NTCD-M3 patients: 71% with 10(7) spores/d and 63% with 10(4) spores/d. Recurrence of CDI occurred in 13 (30%) of 43 placebo patients and 14 (11%) of 125 NTCD-M3 patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11-0.69; P = .006); the lowest recurrence was in 2 (5%) of 43 patients receiving 10(7) spores/d for 7 days (OR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.6; P = .01 vs placebo]). Recurrence occurred in 2 (2%) of 86 patients who were colonized vs 12 (31%) of 39 patients who received NTCD-M3 and were not colonized (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00-0.05; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with CDI who clinically recovered following treatment with metronidazole or vancomycin, oral administration of spores of NTCD-M3 was well tolerated and appeared to be safe. Nontoxigenic C. difficile strain M3 colonized the gastrointestinal tract and significantly reduced CDI recurrence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01259726.
Asunto(s)
Clostridioides difficile , Enterocolitis Seudomembranosa/prevención & control , Prevención Secundaria/métodos , Esporas Bacterianas , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Diarrea/etiología , Método Doble Ciego , Enterocolitis Seudomembranosa/complicaciones , Enterocolitis Seudomembranosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Heces/microbiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Invasive candidiasis is the third most common bloodstream infection in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with morbidity and mortality. Prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are attractive strategies for this setting. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of caspofungin as antifungal prophylaxis in 222 adults who were in the ICU for at least 3 days, were ventilated, received antibiotics, had a central line, and had 1 additional risk factor (parenteral nutrition, dialysis, surgery, pancreatitis, systemic steroids, or other immunosuppressants). Subjects' (1,3)-ß-d-glucan levels were monitored twice weekly. The primary endpoint was the incidence of proven or probable invasive candidiasis by EORTC/MSG criteria in patients who did not have disease at baseline. Patients who had invasive candidiasis were allowed to break the blind and receive preemptive therapy with caspofungin. The preemptive approach analysis included patients all patients who received study drug, including those positive at baseline. RESULTS: The incidence of proven/probable invasive candidiasis in the placebo and caspofungin arms was 16.7% (14/84) and 9.8% (10/102), respectively, for prophylaxis (P = .14), and 30.4% (31/102) and 18.8% (22/117), respectively, for the preemptive approach (P = .04); however, this analysis included patients with baseline disease. There were no significant differences in the secondary endpoints of mortality, antifungal use, or length of stay. There were no safety differences. CONCLUSIONS: Caspofungin was safe and tended to reduce the incidence of invasive candidiasis when used for prophylaxis, but the difference was not statistically significant. A preemptive therapy approach deserves further study. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00520234.