Antimicrobial resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae from invasive pneumococcal diseases in Latin American countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Invasive pneumococcal disease has declined since pneumococcal conjugate vaccine introduction in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). However, serotype distribution and antimicrobial resistance patterns have changed. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the frequency of antimicrobial resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae from invasive disease in LAC. Articles published between 1 January 2000, and 27 December 2022, with no language restriction, were searched in major databases and gray literature. Pairs of reviewers independently selected extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the studies. The quality of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) studies was evaluated according to WHO recommendations (PROSPERO CRD42023392097). Results: From 8,600 records identified, 103 studies were included, with 49,660 positive samples of S. pneumoniae for AMR analysis processed. Most studies were from Brazil (29.1%) and Argentina (18.4%), were cross-sectional (57.3%), reported data on AMR from IPD cases (52.4%), and were classified as moderate risk of bias (50.5%). Resistance to penicillin was 21.7% (95%IC 18.7-25.0, I2: 95.9), and for ceftriaxone/cefotaxime it was 4.7% (95%IC 3.2-6.9, I2: 96.1). The highest resistance for both penicillin and ceftriaxone/cefotaxime was in the age group of 0 to 5 years (32.1% [95%IC 28.2-36.4, I2: 87.7], and 9.7% [95%IC 5.9-15.6, I2: 96.9] respectively). The most frequent serotypes associated with resistance were 14 for penicillin and 19A for ceftriaxone/cefotaxime. Conclusion: Approximately one-quarter of invasive pneumococcal disease isolates in Latin America and the Caribbean displayed penicillin resistance, with higher rates in young children. Ongoing surveillance is essential to monitor serotype evolution and antimicrobial resistance patterns following pneumococcal conjugate vaccine introduction.

Burden of Disease of Gonorrhoea in Latin America: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Neisseria gonorrhoeae causes gonorrhoea, a globally neglected but increasing disease. This systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed the epidemiology and economic burden of gonorrhoea in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, EconLIT, CINAHL, CRD, LILACS, Global Health, Global Dissertations and Theses, SciELO, Web of Science databases, countries' ministries of health, and the IHME's Global Burden of Disease databases. Studies published in the last 10 years (20 years for economic studies) were included if conducted in any LAC country, without language restrictions. The main outcome measures were incidence/prevalence, proportion of co-infections, case fatality rates, specific mortality/hospitalisation rates, direct/indirect costs, and impact of gonorrhoea on quality of life. To assess evidence quality, we used a checklist developed by the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute for observational studies and trial control arms, the Cochrane Effective Practice Organization of Care Group tool for randomised controlled trials, and the CICERO checklist for economic studies. RESULTS: We identified 1290 articles; 115 included epidemiological studies and one included an economic study. Ministry of health data from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Uruguay were identified. Gonorrhoea prevalence was 1.46% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-2.00%) from 48 studies and 5.68% (95% CI 4.23-7.32%) from 58 studies for non-high-risk and high-risk populations, respectively. Cumulative incidence for the high-risk population was 2.05 cases per 100 persons/year. Few published studies were rated as "good" in the risk of bias assessments. Variations in the methodology of the sources and limited information found in the countries' surveillance systems hinder the comparison of data. CONCLUSION: The burden of gonorrhoea in LAC is not negligible. Our results provide public health and clinical decision support to assess potential interventions to prevent gonorrhoea. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021253342). The study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA (GSK study identifier VEO-000025).

Antimicrobial resistance of Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Latin American countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Detailed information is needed on the dynamic pattern of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of AMR in N. gonorrhoeae in LAC. METHODS: Electronic searches without language restrictions were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, EconLIT, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences. Studies were eligible if published between 1 January 2011 and 13 February 2021, conducted in any LAC country (regardless of age, sex and population) and measured frequency and/or patterns of AMR to any antimicrobial in N. gonorrhoeae. The WHO Global Gonococcal Antimicrobial Surveillance Programme (WHO-GASP) for LAC countries and Latin American AMR SurveillanceNetwork databases were searched. AMR study quality was evaluated according to WHO recommendations. RESULTS: AMR data for 38, 417 isolates collected in 1990-2018 were included from 31 publications, reporting data from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela and WHO-GASP. Resistance to extended-spectrum cephalosporins was infrequent (0.09%-8.5%). Resistance to azithromycin was up to 32% in the published studies and up to 61% in WHO-GASP. Resistance to penicillin, tetracycline and ciprofloxacin was high (17.6%-98%, 20.7%-90% and 5.9%-89%, respectively). Resistance to gentamicin was not reported, and resistance to spectinomycin was reported in one study. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides data on resistance to azithromycin, potentially important given its use as first-line empirical treatment, and indicates the need for improved surveillance of gonococcal AMR in LAC. Trial registration: Registered in PROSPERO, CRD42021253342.

Economic burden of herpes zoster in Latin America: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review describes herpes zoster (HZ) economic burden in terms of healthcare resource use and cost outcomes in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region. We searched online databases from 1 January 2000 to 20 February 2020 to identify eligible publications. We identified 23 publications that reported direct costs, indirect costs, and resources associated with HZ and its complications. The primary direct medical resources reported in the different studies were visits to doctors, transportation, days in the hospital, nursing, medication schedules, and physical therapy. Direct total costs per patient ranged from $99.99 to $4177.91. The highest cost was found in Brazil. Direct costs are, in average, 81.39% higher than indirect costs. The cost per patient that includes postherpetic neuralgia treatment is 115% higher on average for the directs and 73% for the indirect costs. Brazil reported a higher total cost per patient than Argentina and Mexico, while for indirect costs per patient, Brazil and Argentina had higher costs than Mexico, respectively. A meta-analysis on the number of days due to HZ hospitalization, performed on non-immunosuppressed patients over 65 years of age from three studies, resulted in a cumulative measure of 4.5 days of hospitalization. In the LAC region, the economic burden of HZ and associated complications is high, particularly among high-risk populations and older age groups. Preventative strategies such as vaccination could help avoid or reduce the HZ-associated disease economic burden in the LAC region.

Safety of components and platforms of COVID-19 vaccines considered for use in pregnancy: A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Rapid assessment of COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy is urgently needed. METHODS: We conducted a rapid systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines selected by the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access-Maternal Immunization Working Group in August 2020, including their components and their technological platforms used in other vaccines for pregnant persons. We searched literature databases, COVID-19 vaccine pregnancy registries, and explored reference lists from the inception date to February 2021 without language restriction. Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through COVIDENCE, and performed the data extraction and the risk of bias assessment. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021234185). RESULTS: We retrieved 6757 records and 12 COVID-19 pregnancy registries from the search strategy; 38 clinical and non-clinical studies (involving 2,398,855 pregnant persons and 56 pregnant animals) were included. Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries and were cohort studies (57%). Most studies (76%) compared vaccine exposures with no exposure during the three trimesters of pregnancy. The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant, in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines, (n = 24) and aluminum-based adjuvants (n = 11). Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA in lipid nanoparticles COVID-19 vaccines. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03), corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns. CONCLUSION: This rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted, given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant persons may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.

Herpes zoster epidemiology in Latin America: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The epidemiology and burden of Herpes Zoster (HZ) are largely unknown, and there are no recent reviews summarizing the available evidence from the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to characterize the epidemiology and burden of HZ in LAC. Bibliographic databases and grey literature sources were consulted to find studies published (January 2000 -February 2020) with epidemiological endpoints: cumulative incidence and incidence density (HZ cases per 100,000 person-years), prevalence, case-fatality rates, HZ mortality, hospitalization rates, and rates of each HZ complication. Twenty-six studies were included with most studies coming from Brazil. No studies reported the incidence of HZ in the general population. In population at higher risk, the cumulative incidence ranged from 318-3,423 cases of HZ per 100,000 persons per year of follow-up. The incidence density was 6.4-36.5 cases per 1,000 person-years. Age was identified as a major risk factor towards HZ incidence which increase significantly in people >50 years of age. Hospitalization rates ranged from 3%-35.7%. The in-hospital HZ mortality rate ranged from 0%-36%. Overall, HZ mortality rates were found to be higher in females across all age groups and countries. The incidence of HZ complications (such as post-herpetic neuralgia, ophthalmic herpes zoster, and Ramsay Hunt syndrome) was higher in the immunosuppressed compared to the immunocompetent population. Acyclovir was the most frequently used therapy. Epidemiological data from Ministry of Health databases (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile y Mexico) and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's Global Burden of Disease project reported stable rates of hospitalizations and deaths over the last 10 years. High-risk groups for HZ impose a considerable burden in LAC. They could benefit from directed healthcare initiatives, including adult immunization, to prevent HZ occurrence and its complications.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines, their components or their platforms for pregnant women: A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women with COVID-19 are at an increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness as well as adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Many countries are vaccinating or considering vaccinating pregnant women with limited available data about the safety of this strategy. Early identification of safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components, or their technological platforms is therefore urgently needed. METHODS: We conducted a rapid systematic review, as the first phase of an ongoing full systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women, including their components, and their technological platforms (whole virus, protein, viral vector or nucleic acid) used in other vaccines, following the Cochrane methods and the PRISMA statement for reporting (PROSPERO-CRD42021234185).We searched literature databases, COVID-19 and pregnancy registries from inception February 2021 without time or language restriction and explored the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews retrieved. We selected studies of any methodological design that included at least 50 pregnant women or pregnant animals exposed to the vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG in August 2020 or their components or platforms included in the COVID-19 vaccines, and evaluated adverse events during pregnancy and the neonatal period.Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through the COVIDENCE web software and performed the data extraction through a previously piloted online extraction form. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: We identified 6768 records, 256 potentially eligible studies were assessed by full-text, and 37 clinical and non-clinical studies (38 reports, involving 2,397,715 pregnant women and 56 pregnant animals) and 12 pregnancy registries were included.Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries. The most frequent study design was cohort studies (n=21), followed by surveillance studies, randomized controlled trials, and registry analyses. Most studies (76%) allowed comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women (n=25) or animals (n=3) and reported exposures during the three trimesters of pregnancy.The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines (n=24), followed by aluminum-based adjuvants (n=11). Aluminum phosphate was used in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Fusion candidate vaccines (n=3) and Tdap vaccines (n=3). Different aluminum-based adjuvants were used in hepatitis vaccines. The replication-deficient simian adenovirus ChAdOx1 was used for a Rift Valley fever vaccine. Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines that also used lipid nanoparticles. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03) - corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns. CONCLUSION: This rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant women may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.

Mobile apps for detecting falsified and substandard drugs: A systematic review.

The use of substandard and counterfeit medicines (SCM) leads to significant health and economic consequences, like treatment failure, rise of antimicrobial resistance, extra expenditures of individuals or households and serious adverse drug reactions including death. Our objective was to systematically search, identify and compare relevant available mobile applications (apps) for smartphones and tablets, which use could potentially affect clinical and public health outcomes. We carried out a systematic review of the literature in January 2020, including major medical databases, and app stores. We used the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) to assess the quality of apps, (1 worst score, 3 acceptable score, and 5 best score). We planned to evaluate the accuracy of the mobile apps to detect SCM. We retrieved 335 references through medical databases and 42 from Apple, Google stores and Google Scholar. We finally included two studies of the medical database, 25 apps (eight from the App Store, eight from Google Play, eight from both stores, and one from Google Scholar), and 16 websites. We only found one report on the accuracy of a mobile apps detecting SCMs. Most apps use the imprint, color or shape for pill identification, and only a few offer pill detection through photographs or bar code. The MARS mean score for the apps was 3.17 (acceptable), with a maximum of 4.9 and a minimum of 1.1. The 'functionality' dimension resulted in the highest mean score (3.4), while the 'engagement' and 'information' dimensions showed the lowest one (3.0). In conclusion, we found a remarkable evidence gap about the accuracy of mobile apps in detecting SCMs. However, mobile apps could potentially be useful to screen for SCM by assessing the physical characteristics of pills, although this should still be assessed in properly designed research studies.