Acceptability of COVID-19 booster vaccine in malaysia: a cross-sectional study.

Despite the high efficacy and safety demonstrated in clinical trials, COVID-19 booster vaccination rates in Malaysia remain below 50% among the general public. This study explores the factors influencing public acceptance of the COVID-19 booster vaccine among the Malaysian population. The questionnaire included variables on sociodemographics, knowledge, and the Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs. Based on the Chi-squared test of contingencies, a t-test and multivariate logistic regression analysis on 411 collected responses, the findings revealed that older participants, individuals of Chinese ethnicity, and those with higher education levels and incomes were more willing to accept booster vaccinations. The analysis further identified perceived susceptibility, perceived severity and perceived barriers as significant predictors influencing booster vaccination acceptance rates. Healthcare policymakers may consider targeting interventions to diminish the obstacles associated with booster vaccinations. These intervention strategies include implementing health intervention programmes, such as public health awareness initiatives, to raise awareness of the risks and severity of COVID-19, ultimately encouraging higher uptake of booster vaccines.

Implementation of COVID-19 vaccination services in prison in six European countries: translating emergency intervention into routine life-course vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Evidence has shown that the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is much higher in prisons than in the community. The release of the COVID-19 vaccine and the recommendation by WHO to include prisons among priority settings have led to the inclusion of prisons in national COVID-19 vaccination strategies. Evidence on prison health and healthcare services provision is limited and often focuses on a single country or institution due to the multiple challenges of conducting research in prison settings. The present study was done in the framework of the EU-founded project RISE-Vac. It aimed to analyse the best practices and challenges applied in implementing COVID-19 universal vaccination services during the pandemic to support future expansion of routine life course vaccination services for people living in prison (PLP). METHODS: Two online cross-sectional surveys were designed and piloted: survey1 on prison characteristics and (non-COVID-19) immunisation practices; survey2 on the implementation and coverage of COVID-19 vaccination with open-ended questions for thematic analysis. Each RISE-Vac project partner distributed the questionnaire to one or two prisons in their country. Answers were collected from eight European prisons' directors or medical directors between November 2021-May 2022. RESULTS: According to our findings, the implementation modalities of COVID-19 vaccination services in the surveyed prisons were effective in improving PLP vaccination coverage. Strategies for optimal management of the vaccination campaign included: periodic time slot for PLP vaccination; new staff recruitment and task shifting; distribution of informational material both to PLP and prison staff. Key challenges included continuity of care after release, immunisation information system, and vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study describing the implementation of COVID-19 vaccination services in European prisons, suggesting that the expansion of vaccination provision in prison is possible. There is no unique solution that will fit every country but commonalities likely to be important in the design and implementation of future vaccination campaigns targeting PLP emerged. Increased availability of vaccination services in prison is not only possible, but feasible and highly desirable, and can contribute to the reduction of health inequalities.

Postpandemic Sentinel Surveillance of Respiratory Diseases in the Context of the World Health Organization Mosaic Framework: Protocol for a Development and Evaluation Study Involving the English Primary Care Network 2023-2024.

BACKGROUND: Prepandemic sentinel surveillance focused on improved management of winter pressures, with influenza-like illness (ILI) being the key clinical indicator. The World Health Organization (WHO) global standards for influenza surveillance include monitoring acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI. The WHO's mosaic framework recommends that the surveillance strategies of countries include the virological monitoring of respiratory viruses with pandemic potential such as influenza. The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioner Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) in collaboration with the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has provided sentinel surveillance since 1967, including virology since 1993. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe the RSC's plans for sentinel surveillance in the 2023-2024 season and evaluate these plans against the WHO mosaic framework. METHODS: Our approach, which includes patient and public involvement, contributes to surveillance objectives across all 3 domains of the mosaic framework. We will generate an ARI phenotype to enable reporting of this indicator in addition to ILI. These data will support UKHSA's sentinel surveillance, including vaccine effectiveness and burden of disease studies. The panel of virology tests analyzed in UKHSA's reference laboratory will remain unchanged, with additional plans for point-of-care testing, pneumococcus testing, and asymptomatic screening. Our sampling framework for serological surveillance will provide greater representativeness and more samples from younger people. We will create a biomedical resource that enables linkage between clinical data held in the RSC and virology data, including sequencing data, held by the UKHSA. We describe the governance framework for the RSC. RESULTS: We are co-designing our communication about data sharing and sampling, contextualized by the mosaic framework, with national and general practice patient and public involvement groups. We present our ARI digital phenotype and the key data RSC network members are requested to include in computerized medical records. We will share data with the UKHSA to report vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19 and influenza, assess the disease burden of respiratory syncytial virus, and perform syndromic surveillance. Virological surveillance will include COVID-19, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and other common respiratory viruses. We plan to pilot point-of-care testing for group A streptococcus, urine tests for pneumococcus, and asymptomatic testing. We will integrate test requests and results with the laboratory-computerized medical record system. A biomedical resource will enable research linking clinical data to virology data. The legal basis for the RSC's pseudonymized data extract is The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002, and all nonsurveillance uses require research ethics approval. CONCLUSIONS: The RSC extended its surveillance activities to meet more but not all of the mosaic framework's objectives. We have introduced an ARI indicator. We seek to expand our surveillance scope and could do more around transmissibility and the benefits and risks of nonvaccine therapies.

Measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination coverage: an ecological study of primary health care and socio-economic factors in Catalonia, Spain.

This study examined the association of socio-economic factors and the structure of primary care centres (PCCs) with measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination coverage among the 8-year-old population in Catalonia, Spain. We conducted an ecological study to retrospectively assess the MMR vaccination-recorded status of children born in 2012, using public health data extracted in December 2020. For each of 300 PCCs serving 70,498 children, we calculated vaccination coverage rates from electronic health records and linked these rates to a composite deprivation index corresponding to the territory served by each PCC. We identified a relationship between unfavourable socio-economic factors and higher recorded vaccination coverage. On average, directly managed PCCs had higher vaccination coverage rates than indirectly managed PCCs. Greater utilisation of primary care services by the population was also associated with higher vaccination coverage rates. Further research is needed to generate knowledge valuable for informing more equitable child-vaccination service delivery models.

The Uptake of Pneumococcal and Seasonal Influenza Vaccinations Based on Perceptions and Attitudes Toward the COVID-19 Vaccine Among Patients With Diabetes.

Objective In this study, we aimed to assess the rates of pneumococcal and seasonal influenza vaccinations among elderly and nonelderly diabetes patients and examine their perceptions and attitudes toward the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. Methods A single-center study was conducted among patients with diabetes, employing a structured survey encompassing sociodemographic data, vaccination records, and the COVID-19 vaccine perception and attitude scale. Results Among the 280 diabetes patients in our study, the vaccination rates for COVID-19, seasonal influenza, and pneumococcal vaccines were 96.1%, 16.8%, and 17.5%, respectively. A higher cumulative dosage of the COVID-19 vaccine was associated with older age (r = 0.463; p<0.001), increased safety score (r = 0.479; p<0.001), and lower conspiracy theory score (r = -0.336; p<0.001). Participants who had received COVID-19 and influenza vaccines were observed to have significantly higher safety scores related to COVID-19 vaccines (p<0.001; d = 2.381 and p = 0.008; d = 0.525, respectively). Notably, vaccination rates for influenza and pneumococcus were significantly different between nonelderly and elderly patients (8.7% vs. 29.6%; p<0.001 and 13.4% vs. 24.1%; p = 0.022). Elderly patients with diabetes were 3.3 times more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than nonelderly participants [odds ratio (OR) = 3.319; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.592 - 6.920; p = 0.001] and had a higher safety score related to COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 1.076; 95% CI = 1.011 - 1.146; p = 0.021). Conclusions Both influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates were below the desired targets in this study. The vaccination rates among the nonelderly diabetes population suggest that this group may be more likely to neglect to receive vaccination compared to the elderly diabetes population. The association between vaccination rates and post-pandemic safety perceptions highlights the critical need to implement public health strategies specifically designed to address and improve safety-related information dissemination.

Case report: Atypical case of autoimmune glial fibrillary acidic protein astrocytopathy following COVID-19 vaccination refractory to immunosuppressive treatments.

A 54-year-old Japanese man presented with headache and fever the day after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. He became deeply unconscious within a week. Brain MRI showed periventricular linear enhancements and a few spotty lesions in the cerebral white matter. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing showed mild pleocytosis. He was treated with intravenous methylprednisolone and plasma exchange. However, the white matter lesions enlarged to involve the brainstem and cerebellum, and long cord spinal lesions appeared. Anti-glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) antibody was positive in the CSF and serum, and he was therefore diagnosed as autoimmune GFAP-astrocytopathy (GFAP-A). In addition, high-dose immunoglobulin therapy was administered twice, but his symptoms did not improve; the white matter lesions enlarged further, and modified Rankin Scale score increased to 5. A brain biopsy specimen showed infiltration of macrophages and CD4 + lymphocytes together with neuron and oligodendrocytic injuries and glial scar. Although GFAP-A generally responds well to steroids, the present case developed GFAP-A following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, with refractory to intensive immunosuppressive therapy and atypical pathologic findings of infiltration of CD4 + lymphocytes and demyelination.

The 5 C model and Mpox vaccination behavior in Germany: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Due to the authorization of the Mpox vaccines, we aimed to identify determinants of the intention to get vaccinated, actively trying to receive vaccination, and for successfully receiving a vaccination in Germany employing the 5 C model of vaccination readiness. METHODS: Data stem from a cross-sectional online survey that was available online from August 13, 2022 to August 31, 2022. To assess the influence of the 5 C Model on vaccination behavior, we conducted a multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: 3,338 participants responded to the survey, with 487 already vaccinated and 2,066 intending to receive a vaccination. Confidence and collective responsibility were positively associated with intention to get vaccinated, while complacency was negatively correlated. A higher score on the calculation scale increased the odds of intention to receive vaccination but not with actively having tried to receive a vaccination. Fewer perceived constraints were associated with higher odds to be vaccinated. Patients in practices that focus on HIV treatment were more likely to intend to get vaccinated, to have tried to get vaccinated and to be vaccinated, regardless of indication. While level of education had no impact, having an indication to get vaccinated was a strong predictor of vaccination behavior in all groups. CONCLUSION: Future vaccination campaigns should aim to reduce specific constraints of the target group and make vaccines widely available in primary care institutions beyond HIV-focused practices.

COVID-19 vaccinations for patients with epilepsy in Guizhou Province, China: A cross-sectional study.

Several COVID-19 vaccines have been approved for emergency use according to China's immunization programs. These vaccines has created hope for patients with epilepsy, because the vaccines can help to reduce their risk of becoming infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of this study was to investigate the COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with epilepsy. Here, we assessed the time of symptom control and the features of adverse events of seizure patients following their COVID-19 vaccinations. The results showed that adverse events of COVID-19 vaccinations for epilepsy patients included local pain at the injection site, dizziness and headache, epileptic attack, somnolence, limb weakness, limb pain, allergy, and fever. In addition, the average recovery time of the adverse events was approximately 42 h. More importantly, our study showed that it was relatively safe to vaccinate epilepsy patients who did not experience seizures for approximately 12 months prior to the immunization date.

Subjective Rationalities of Nonadherence to Treatment and Vaccination in Healthcare Decision-Making.

Objective: In this short report contributing to the literature on treatment and vaccination adherence, nonadherence was examined from the perspective of decision-making (DM) practice in healthcare. The objective of this study was to survey the rationalities given for treatment nonadherence and their association with DM practice. Methods: The Ottawa decision Support Framework was used as a theoretical background for the study. Multiple choice and open-text responses indicating nonadherence were drawn from vignette survey data. The results have been analyzed and reported as descriptive statistics and findings of data-driven content analysis. The number of observatory units was 1032 in the within-subject study design. Results: DM practice was predominantly associated with nonadherence to vaccination, whereas nonadherence to treatment was consistently associated with attitudinal reasons independent of DM practice. Nonadherence to vaccination was most often rationalized by prior negative experiences in simple DM scenarios. After other DM practices, nonadherence was rationalized by uncertainty and criticism about the benefits of the recommended vaccine. Mistrust toward healthcare providers stood out, first in treatment nonadherence generally and, second, in vaccination nonadherence after simple DM where the final decision was left to the patient. Conclusion: In medical DM, adherence to treatment and vaccination may be achieved through a recognition of patients' previous healthcare encounters and potential trust-related concerns, which could pose a risk for nonadherence. To be able to observe these risks, patient engagement and mutual trust should be priorities in decision support in healthcare.

Research on treatment and vaccination adherence aim at increasing knowledge about improving adherence and treatment outcomes. This study examined explanations given for not adhering to treatment and an association between the explanations and medical decision-making practices. Decision-making practices are known to impact patient­physician interaction and the patients' motivation to have an active role at the appointment. In a shared decision-making (SDM) practice, patients' participation is encouraged. SDM is built on both medical expertise of the practitioner and individual views, values and preferences of the patient. As opposed to SDM, authoritarian decision-making refers to a practice in which decisions are made solely by the physician. In guided decision-making, the physician shares information with the patient but makes the final decision. In simple decision-making, the final decision is left to the patient after consultation. This empirical study used illustrated vignette survey data from Finland. Out of the 1935 respondents, 64% were female with an average age of 68. In the study design, nonadherence was presumed to depend on a decision-making practice presented. Primary findings showed that nonadherence to treatment is most correlated with attitudinal predetermination of the patient and mistrust toward healthcare providers. Nonadherence to vaccination had a stronger association with decision-making practices. After simple decision-making, declining vaccination was most often explained by prior negative experiences and mistrust toward healthcare providers. After other decision-making practices, explanations for declining included uncertainty and criticism about the benefits of the recommended vaccine. This study underscores the pivotal role of trust in the patient-physician interaction.

Pityriasis following COVID-19 vaccinations: a systematic review.

In the wake of a global COVID-19 pandemic, where innovations in vaccination technology and the speed of development and distribution have been unprecedented, a wide variety of post-vaccination cutaneous reactions have surfaced. However, there has not been a systematic review that investigates pityriasis eruptions and the associated variants following COVID-19 inoculations. A PubMed search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was performed to find case reports from the earliest record through November 2022. Data including types of vaccination and pityriasis were extracted and a quality review was performed; 47 reports with 94 patients were found: 64.9% had pityriasis rosea (PR), 3.2% PR-like eruptions, 16.0% pityriasis rubra pilaris, 7.4% pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta, 3.2% pityriasis lichenoides chronica, and 5.3% had reactions described as atypical. The top three COVID-19 vaccinations reported were Pfizer-BioNTech (47.9%), Oxford-AstraZeneca (11.7%), and Moderna (8.5%). Pityriasis reactivity was reported most frequently after the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination, with pityriasis rosea being the most common variant. A large difference was additionally found between the ratio of post-vaccination pityriasis reactions following Pfizer and Moderna vaccinations (5.63), and the ratio of Pfizer's usage in the United States as of December 28, 2022 relative to that of Moderna (1.59). Further studies with adequate follow-up periods and diagnostic testing will thus need to be performed to elucidate the root of this discrepancy and better characterize the association between different pityriasis reactions and COVID-19 vaccinations.

Evaluating Pilot Implementation of 'PenCS Flu Topbar' App in Medical Practices to Improve National Immunisation Program-Funded Seasonal Influenza Vaccination in Central Queensland, Australia.

BACKGROUND: The 'PenCS Flu Topbar' app was deployed in Central Queensland (CQ), Australia, medical practices through a pilot programme in March 2021. METHODS: We evaluated the app's user experience and examined whether the introduction of 'PenCS Flu Topbar' in medical practices could improve the coverage of NIP-funded influenza vaccinations. We conducted a mixed-method study including a qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with key end-users and a quantitative analysis of influenza vaccine administrative data. RESULTS: 'PenCS Flu Topbar' app users reported positive experiences identifying patients eligible for NIP-funded seasonal influenza vaccination. A total of 3606 NIP-funded influenza vaccinations was administered in the eight intervention practices, 14% higher than the eight control practices. NIP-funded vaccination coverage within practices was significantly higher in the intervention practices (31.2%) than in the control practices (27.3%) (absolute difference: 3.9%; 95% CI: 2.9%-5.0%; p < 0.001). The coverage was substantially higher in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged more than 6 months, pregnant women and children aged 6 months to less than 5 years for the practices where the app was introduced when compared to control practices: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.4 (95% CI: 1.8-3.2), IRR 2.7 (95% CI: 1.8-4.2) and IRR 2.3 (1.8-2.9) times higher, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our evaluation indicated that the 'PenCS Flu Topbar' app is useful for identifying the patients eligible for NIP-funded influenza vaccination and is likely to increase NIP-funded influenza vaccine coverage in the eligible populations. Future impact evaluation including a greater number of practices and a wider geographical area is essential.

Behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation in the US: a longitudinal study March─ October 2021.

Many studies have examined behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation, but few have examined these drivers longitudinally. We sought to identify the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Participants were a nationally-representative sample of 1,563 US adults who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine by baseline. Participants took surveys online at baseline (spring 2021) and follow-up (fall 2021). The surveys assessed variables from BeSD Framework domains (i.e., thinking and feeling, social processes, and practical issues), COVID-19 vaccination initiation, and demographics at baseline and follow-up. Between baseline and follow-up, 65% of respondents reported initiating COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccination intent increased from baseline to follow-up (p < .01). Higher vaccine confidence, more positive social norms towards vaccination, and receiving vaccine recommendations at baseline predicted subsequent COVID-19 vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Among factors assessed at follow-up, social responsibility and vaccine requirements had the greatest associations with vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Baseline vaccine confidence, social norms, and vaccination recommendations were associated with subsequent vaccine initiation, all of which could be useful targets for behavioral interventions. Furthermore, interventions that highlight social responsibility to vaccinate or promote vaccination requirements could also be beneficial.

Multicentre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of the meningococcal B vaccine, 4CMenB (Bexsero), against Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection in men who have sex with men: the GoGoVax study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Gonorrhoea, the sexually transmissible infection caused by Neisseria gonorrhoeae, has a substantial impact on sexual and reproductive health globally with an estimated 82 million new infections each year worldwide. N. gonorrhoeae antimicrobial resistance continues to escalate, and disease control is largely reliant on effective therapy as there is no proven effective gonococcal vaccine available. However, there is increasing evidence from observational cohort studies that the serogroup B meningococcal vaccine four-component meningitis B vaccine (4CMenB) (Bexsero), licensed to prevent invasive disease caused by Neisseria meningitidis, may provide cross-protection against the closely related bacterium N. gonorrhoeae. This study will evaluate the efficacy of 4CMenB against N. gonorrhoeae infection in men (cis and trans), transwomen and non-binary people who have sex with men (hereafter referred to as GBM+). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial in GBM+, either HIV-negative on pre-exposure prophylaxis against HIV or living with HIV (CD4 count >350 cells/mm3), who have had a diagnosis of gonorrhoea or infectious syphilis in the last 18 months (a key characteristic associated with a high risk of N. gonorrhoeae infection). Participants are randomised 1:1 to receive two doses of 4CMenB or placebo 3 months apart. Participants have 3-monthly visits over 24 months, which include testing for N. gonorrhoeae and other sexually transmissible infections, collection of demographics, sexual behaviour risks and antibiotic use, and collection of research samples for analysis of N. gonorrhoeae-specific systemic and mucosal immune responses. The primary outcome is the incidence of the first episode of N. gonorrhoeae infection, as determined by nucleic acid amplification tests, post month 4. Additional outcomes consider the incidence of symptomatic or asymptomatic N. gonorrhoeae infection at different anatomical sites (ie, urogenital, anorectum or oropharynx), incidence by N. gonorrhoeae genotype and antimicrobial resistance phenotype, and level and functional activity of N. gonorrhoeae-specific antibodies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the St Vincent's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee, St Vincent's Hospital Sydney, NSW, Australia (ref: 2020/ETH01084). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and via presentation at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04415424.

Nonstructural barriers to adult vaccination.

Adult vaccination coverage remains low, despite vaccine recommendations, improved access, and reimbursement. Low vaccination coverage and an aging population at higher risk from vaccine-preventable diseases lead to preventable disability and deaths, straining healthcare systems. An Advisory Board meeting was, therefore, held to identify non-structural barriers to adult vaccination and discuss potential solutions to increase uptake. Many non-structural factors can influence vaccine uptake, such as heterogeneity in the population, (fear of) vaccine shortages, incentives, or mandates for vaccination, understanding of disease burden and personal risks, time and opportunity for healthcare providers (HCPs) to discuss and deliver vaccines during general practice or hospital visits, trust in the health system, and education. To address these barriers, push-pull mechanisms are required: to pull patients in for vaccination and to push HCP performance on vaccination delivery. For patients, the focus should be on lifelong prevention and quality of life benefits: personal conversations are needed to increase confidence and knowledge about vaccination, and credible communication is required to build trust in health services and normalize vaccination. For providers, quality measurements are required to prioritize vaccination and ensure opportunities to check vaccination status, discuss and deliver vaccines are not missed. Financial and quality-based incentives may help increase uptake.

What is the context?● As populations age, healthcare systems are increasingly struggling with the burden of adult disease. Multiple vaccines are already recommended for adults throughout their lifetime, and more are coming soon, however, even in countries with subsidized programs, few adults are fully vaccinated, leading to frequent cases of illness, disability, hospitalization, or death, which could have been prevented.What is new?● Experts from Europe and the US joined an Advisory Board meeting to find out what is stopping people from getting vaccinated, particularly when vaccines are free, and how this can be helped in future.● The decision to get vaccinated can vary for different subgroups of the population, and can be influenced by vaccine shortages, rules about vaccination, and understanding the disease severity and need for vaccination. In addition, doctors may not have enough time and opportunity to discuss and provide vaccines during visits or may not feel comfortable raising the issue of vaccination with their patients.● To overcome these issues, both patients and doctors must change. Patients need: greater awareness of how illness impacts overall health and quality of life; better conversations with their doctors to address vaccination concerns; and trustworthy information from health services. For providers, vaccination prioritization should be linked to quality measurements, with collaboration from trusted community members to reinforce the importance of prevention, thus ensuring opportunities are not missed to discuss prevention and vaccinate. Normalizing adult vaccination is important for this.What is the impact?● Taking a patient centered prevention approach will help protect adults and ease the burden of vaccine-preventable disease.

Efficacy of LCMV-based cancer immunotherapies is unleashed by intratumoral injections of polyI:C.

BACKGROUND: Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) belongs to the Arenavirus family known for inducing strong cytotoxic T-cell responses in both mice and humans. LCMV has been engineered for the development of cancer immunotherapies, currently undergoing evaluation in phase I/II clinical trials. Initial findings have demonstrated safety and an exceptional ability to activate and expand tumor-specific T lymphocytes. Combination strategies to maximize the antitumor effectiveness of LCMV-based immunotherapies are being explored. METHODS: We assessed the antitumor therapeutic effects of intratumoral administration of polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (poly(I:C)) and systemic vaccination using an LCMV-vector expressing non-oncogenic versions of the E6 and E7 antigens of human papillomavirus 16 (artLCMV-E7E6) in a bilateral model engrafting TC-1/A9 cells. This cell line, derived from the parental TC-1, exhibits low MHC class I expression and is highly immune-resistant. The mechanisms underlying the combination's efficacy were investigated through bulk RNA-seq, flow cytometry analyses of the tumor microenvironment, selective depletions using antibodies and clodronate liposomes, Batf3 deficient mice, and in vivo bioluminescence experiments. Finally, we assessed the antitumor effectiveness of the combination of artLCMV-E7E6 with BO-112, a GMP-grade poly(I:C) formulated in polyethyleneimine, currently under evaluation in clinical trials. RESULTS: Intratumoral injection of poly(I:C) enhanced the antitumor efficacy of artLCMV-E7E6 in both injected and non-injected tumor lesions. The combined treatment resulted in a significant delay in tumor growth and often complete eradication of several tumor lesions, leading to significantly improved survival compared with monotherapies. While intratumoral administration of poly(I:C) did not impact LCMV vector biodistribution or transgene expression, it significantly modified leucocyte infiltrates within the tumor microenvironment and amplified systemic efficacy through proinflammatory cytokines/chemokines such as CCL3, CCL5, CXCL10, TNF, IFNα, and IL12p70. Upregulation of MHC on tumor cells and a reconfiguration of the gene expression programs related to tumor vasculature, leucocyte migration, and the activation profile of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T lymphocytes were observed. Indeed, the antitumor effect relied on the functions of CD8+ T lymphocytes and macrophages. The synergistic efficacy of the combination was further confirmed when BO-112 was included. CONCLUSION: Intratumoral injection of poly(I:C) sensitizes MHClow tumors to the antitumor effects of artLCMV-E7E6, resulting in a potent therapeutic synergy.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the general population and under-resourced communities from high-income countries: realist review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare vaccination willingness before rollout and 1 year post-rollout uptake among the general population and under-resourced communities in high-income countries. DESIGN: A realist review. DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Dimensions ai and Google Scholar. SETTING: High-income countries. DEFINITIONS: We defined vaccination willingness as the proportion of participants willing or intending to receive vaccines prior to availability. We defined vaccine uptake as the real proportion of the population with complete vaccination as reported by each country until November 2021. RESULTS: We included data from 62 studies and 18 high-income countries. For studies conducted among general populations, the proportion of vaccination willingness was 67% (95% CI 62% to 72%). In real-world settings, the overall proportion of vaccine uptake among those countries was 73% (95% CI 69% to 76%). 17 studies reported pre-rollout willingness for under-resourced communities. The summary proportion of vaccination willingness from studies reporting results among people from under-resourced communities was 52% (95% CI 0.46% to 0.57%). Real-world evidence about vaccine uptake after rollout among under-resourced communities was limited. CONCLUSION: Our review emphasises the importance of realist reviews for assessing vaccine acceptance. Limited real-world evidence about vaccine uptake among under-resourced communities in high-income countries is a call to context-specific actions and reporting.

Second booster dose improves antibody neutralization against BA.1, BA.5 and BQ.1.1 in individuals previously immunized with CoronaVac plus BNT162B2 booster protocol.

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines production and distribution enabled the return to normalcy worldwide, but it was not fast enough to avoid the emergence of variants capable of evading immune response induced by prior infections and vaccination. This study evaluated, against Omicron sublineages BA.1, BA.5 and BQ.1.1, the antibody response of a cohort vaccinated with a two doses CoronaVac protocol and followed by two heterologous booster doses. Methods: To assess vaccination effectiveness, serum samples were collected from 160 individuals, in 3 different time points (9, 12 and 18 months after CoronaVac protocol). For each time point, individuals were divided into 3 subgroups, based on the number of additional doses received (No booster, 1 booster and 2 boosters), and a viral microneutralization assay was performed to evaluate neutralization titers and seroconvertion rate. Results: The findings presented here show that, despite the first booster, at 9m time point, improved neutralization level against omicron ancestor BA.1 (133.1 to 663.3), this trend was significantly lower for BQ.1.1 and BA.5 (132.4 to 199.1, 63.2 to 100.2, respectively). However, at 18m time point, the administration of a second booster dose considerably improved the antibody neutralization, and this was observed not only against BA.1 (2361.5), but also against subvariants BQ.1.1 (726.1) and BA.5 (659.1). Additionally, our data showed that, after first booster, seroconvertion rate for BA.5 decayed over time (93.3% at 12m to 68.4% at 18m), but after the second booster, seroconvertion was completely recovered (95% at 18m). Discussion: Our study reinforces the concerns about immunity evasion of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariants, where BA.5 and BQ.1.1 were less neutralized by vaccine induced antibodies than BA.1. On the other hand, the administration of a second booster significantly enhanced antibody neutralization capacity against these subvariants. It is likely that, as new SARS-CoV-2 subvariants continue to emerge, additional immunizations will be needed over time.

Racial/ethnic differences in the associations between trust in the U.S. healthcare system and willingness to test for and vaccinate against COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Trust in the healthcare system may impact adherence to recommended healthcare practices, including willingness to test for and vaccinate against COVID-19. This study examined racial/ethnic differences in the associations between trust in the U.S. healthcare system and willingness to test for and vaccinate against COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from the REACH-US study, a nationally representative online survey conducted among a diverse sample of U.S. adults from January 26, 2021-March 3, 2021 (N = 5,121). Multivariable logistic regression estimated the associations between trust in the U.S. healthcare system (measured as "Always", "Most of the time", "Sometimes/Almost Never", and "Never") and willingness to test for COVID-19, and willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Racial/ethnic differences in these associations were examined using interaction terms and multigroup analyses. RESULTS: Always trusting the U.S. healthcare system was highest among Hispanic/Latino Spanish Language Preference (24.9%) and Asian (16.7%) adults and lowest among Multiracial (8.7%) and Black/African American (10.7%) adults. Always trusting the U.S. healthcare system, compared to never, was associated with greater willingness to test for COVID-19 (AOR: 3.20, 95% CI: 2.38-4.30) and greater willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 2.68, 95% CI: 1.97-3.65). CONCLUSIONS: Trust in the U.S. healthcare system was associated with greater willingness to test for COVID-19 and receive the COVID-19 vaccine, however, trust in the U.S. healthcare system was lower among most marginalized racial/ethnic groups. Efforts to establish a more equitable healthcare system that increases trust may encourage COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

The Evaluation of Menstrual Alterations in Mexican Women After Vaccination Against COVID-19.

Introduction Menstrual changes after COVID-19 vaccination suggest a secondary connection to the immune response to vaccination rather than a specific component of the vaccine. The evaluation of these alterations in women with the same and multiple vaccination schedules will provide valuable information. Methods An observational, cross-sectional study was carried out; data were collected through a survey of 164 vaccinated women at the American British Cowdray (ABC) Santa Fe Medical Center Hospital in Mexico City. The survey was validated by the Delphi method. Results The survey was applied from March 2023 to February 2024. Post-vaccination menstrual alterations occurred in 48.1%; the most frequent alteration was menorrhagia in 20.7% and pain accompanied by menstruation in 27.4%. Fifty-seven percent had a history of previous COVID-19 infection. There were no significant associations between changes in menstrual bleeding after vaccination, history of COVID-19 infection, and age group (p>0.9). However, women who received multiple doses of vaccines had a higher risk of suffering abnormalities in bleeding by 36.6%. Conclusion The incidence of menstrual disorders in this study post COVID-19 vaccination was 49%. Menstrual alterations in patients who received multiple doses and a single regimen were similar at 47% and 48%, where there is no statistical significance. The greatest number of menstrual alterations was seen in the first dose at 36%, probably due to the immunity they acquired after the different types of vaccination. Vaccination is a very effective way to prevent the severity of COVID-19 infection; it has an impact on menstrual bleeding in terms of menorrhagia and metrorrhagia. Vaccination against COVID-19 is associated with small changes in the menstrual cycle, without statistical significance. Women receiving the first dose of the vaccine had changes in the amount of bleeding specifically the amount.