Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
2.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 19(8): 727-744, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32702246

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become an increasing source of biological treatments. Clinicians should make an effort to update their knowledge on mechanisms of action, indications, and adverse events of these novel therapies. Most of them have immunosuppressive effects and, therefore, vaccination is indicated. AREAS COVERED: vaccination of patients under mAbs therapies. EXPERT OPINION: Recommendations on vaccination are still based on expert recommendations and have not been updated in recent years. Specific recommendations for each mAb have not been addressed in the current literature. The aim of this comprehensive review was to collect all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 1 January 2020 and, based on previous recommendations and the pharmaceutical characteristics of each drug, to propose an updated guide with recommendations on vaccination. Influenza, sequential pneumococcal and Hepatitis B vaccination in patients with negative serology were the only consistent recommendations. Hepatitis A vaccination was proposed for mAbs with special hepatotoxic characteristics. Other vaccines are reviewed and discussed. Several non-immunosuppressive mAbs were detected and, therefore, vaccinations not recommended. We hope that this review can serve as a starting point for compiling updated vaccination recommendations and collecting all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 2020.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Vaccination/methods , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Immunosuppressive Agents/immunology , Vaccines/immunology
3.
J Am Coll Nutr ; 28(1): 1-6, 2009 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19571153

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the risk of PD associated with tea consumption. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed all observational studies that evaluated the association between PD risk and tea consumption. Only, 12 studies were identified: 11 case-control and 1 cohort. These studies were carried out between 1981 and 2003. The studies represented different populations from 3 continents; North America, Europe and Asia. The 3 studies from Asia were case-control studies of Chinese populations. RESULTS: There was a clear protective effect of tea consumption in the pooled risk estimate [OR: 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.92)] with 2215 cases and 145578 controls. However, the homogeneity test was significant (p value of 0.008), denoting heterogeneity across the pooled studies. Pooled analysis applying the random effect model was OR: 0.81 with 95% confidence interval nearly overlapping unity (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.98). Tea consumers versus non-consumers in Chinese populations had pooled OR of 0.73 with 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.90 (470 cases and 623 controls). The p value of homogeneity test was 0.96, denoting homogeneity across the pooled 3 studies. CONCLUSION: Tea consumption can protect against PD and this protective effect is clearer in Chinese populations. The low rate of tea consumption among persons with PD should provide us many valuable insights into the nature of the illness.


Subject(s)
Parkinson Disease/prevention & control , Phytotherapy , Plant Preparations/therapeutic use , Tea , Asia , Beverages , Confidence Intervals , Epidemiologic Studies , Europe , Humans , North America , Odds Ratio , Parkinson Disease/ethnology
4.
Neurol Res ; 29(1): 91-5, 2007 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17427282

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To estimate the pooled risk of coffee consumption for Alzheimer's disease (AD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We have reviewed all observational studies that evaluated the association between AD risk and coffee consumption. Four studies were identified: two case-control studies and two cohorts. These studies were carried out between 1990 and 2002. RESULTS: There was an obvious protective effect of coffee consumption in the pooled estimate [risk estimate: 0.73 (95% confidence interval: 0.58-0.92)]. However, the homogeneity test was highly significant (p<0.01), indicating heterogeneity across the pooled studies. Pooled analysis applying the random effect model was 0.79 with 95% confidence interval overlapping unity (95% confidence interval: 0.46-1.36). Three studies assessed coffee consumption by interview questionnaire. The risk of AD in coffee consumers versus non-consumers in studies that used interview questionnaire had a pooled risk estimate of 0.70 with 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.90. CONCLUSION: Although our pooled estimates show that coffee consumption is inversely associated with the risk of AD, the four studies had heterogeneous methodologies and results. Further prospective studies evaluating the association between coffee consumption and AD are strongly needed.


Subject(s)
Alzheimer Disease/etiology , Alzheimer Disease/prevention & control , Coffee , Feeding Behavior/physiology , Alzheimer Disease/drug therapy , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , Humans , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Gac Sanit ; 18(3): 190-6, 2004.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15228917

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The accumulation of risk factors in hospitalized patients is one of the elements contributing to the increase in the frequency of nosocomial infection in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our aim was to identify nosocomial infection risk factors in the ICU of our hospital. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 1,134 patients admitted to the ICU for at least 24 hours in 2001. The patients were followed-up for 48 hours after leaving the ICU. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors. RESULTS: The intrinsic risk factors identified were the principal diagnosis motivating admission to the ICU, traumatic brain injury and renal insufficiency. Invasive techniques that were independently associated with nosocomial infection (from high to low risk) were urinary catheter, tracheostomy, mechanical ventilation, Swan-Ganz catheter, and total parenteral nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Although endogenous risk factors, which cannot be modified, represented the most important associated factors, steps to reduce nosocomial infections should concentrate on the following exogenous risk factors: urinary catheter, tracheostomy, mechanical ventilation, Swan-Ganz catheters, and total parenteral nutrition.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Adult , Aged , Brain Injuries/complications , Catheterization, Swan-Ganz/adverse effects , Cohort Studies , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Parenteral Nutrition, Total/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Regression Analysis , Renal Insufficiency/complications , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Urinary Catheterization/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...