Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
EClinicalMedicine ; 42: 101176, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34765952

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Country-specific evidence is needed to guide decisions regarding whether and how to implement lung cancer screening in different settings. For this study, we estimated the potential numbers of individuals screened and lung cancer deaths prevented in Brazil after applying different strategies to define screening eligibility. METHODS: We applied the Lung Cancer Death Risk Assessment Tool (LCDRAT) to survey data on current and former smokers (ever-smokers) in 15 Brazilian state capital cities that comprise 18% of the Brazilian population. We evaluated three strategies to define eligibility for screening: (1) pack-years and cessation time (≥30 pack-years and <15 years since cessation); (2) the LCDRAT risk model with a fixed risk threshold; and (3) LCDRAT with age-specific risk thresholds. FINDINGS: Among 2.3 million Brazilian ever-smokers aged 55-79 years, 21,459 (95%CI 20,532-22,387) lung cancer deaths were predicted over 5 years without screening. Applying the fixed risk-based eligibility definition would prevent more lung cancer deaths than the pack-years definition [2,939 (95%CI 2751-3127) vs. 2,500 (95%CI 2318-2681) lung cancer deaths], and with higher screening efficiency [NNS=177 (95%CI 170-183) vs. 205 (95%CI 194-216)], but would tend to screen older individuals [mean age 67.8 (95%CI 67.5-68.2) vs. 63.4 (95%CI 63.0-63.9) years]. Applying age-specific risk thresholds would allow younger ever-smokers to be screened, although these individuals would be at lower risk. The age-specific thresholds strategy would avert three-fifths (60.1%) of preventable lung cancer deaths [N = 2629 (95%CI 2448-2810)] by screening 21.9% of ever-smokers. INTERPRETATION: The definition of eligibility impacts the efficiency of lung cancer screening and the mean age of the eligible population. As implementation of lung screening proceeds in different countries, our analytical framework can be used to guide similar analyses in other contexts. Due to limitations of our models, more research would be needed.

2.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 10(10): 2965-74, 2014.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25483632

ABSTRACT

The glutathione S-transferase (GST)-L1 multiplex serology assay has favorable properties for use in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies, including low cost, high throughput capacity, and low serum volume requirement. Therefore, we evaluated the GST-L1 assay as a measure of HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity. Our study population included 65 women selected from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial who received the bivalent HPV16/18 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine at the recommended 0/1/6-month schedule. We tested replicate serum samples from months 0/1/12 (i.e., after 0/1/3 doses) by GST-L1 and 3 other commonly used serology assays, VLP-ELISA, SEAP-NA, and cLIA. We calculated the percentage of women seropositive by GST-L1 by time point and HPV type (14 HPV types), and compared GST-L1 to other assays using Spearman rank correlation coefficients. After 1 vaccine dose, seropositivity by GST-L1 was 40% each for HPV16 and HPV18, increasing to 100% and 98%, respectively, after 3 doses. Seropositivity after 3 doses ranged from 32% to 69% for HPV types 31/33/45, for which partial vaccine efficacy is reported, though increases also occurred for types with no evidence for cross-protection (e.g., HPV77). GST-L1 correlated best after 3 doses with VLP-ELISA (HPV16 and HPV18 each ρ = 0.72) and SEAP-NA (HPV16 ρ = 0.65, HPV18 ρ = 0.71) (all P < 0.001); correlation was lower with cLIA. The GST-L1 is suitable for evaluating HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity after 3 vaccine doses, although in contrast to other assays it may classify some samples as HPV16/18 seronegative. The assay's utility is limited for lower antibody levels such as after receipt of 1 dose.


Subject(s)
Biological Assay/methods , Human papillomavirus 16/immunology , Human papillomavirus 18/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibody Formation/immunology , Costa Rica , Cross Protection , Female , Glutathione Transferase/metabolism , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Reproducibility of Results , Vaccination
3.
BMC Infect Dis ; 14: 120, 2014 Mar 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24588945

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several assays are used to measure type-specific serological responses to human papillomavirus (HPV), including the bead-based glutathione S-transferase (GST)-L1 multiplex serology assay and virus-like particle (VLP)-based ELISA. We evaluated the high-throughput GST-L1, which is increasingly used in epidemiologic research, as a measure of cumulative HPV infection and future immune protection among HPV-unvaccinated women. METHODS: We tested enrollment sera from participants in the control arm of the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (n = 488) for HPV16 and HPV18 using GST-L1, VLP-ELISA, and two assays that measure neutralizing antibodies (cLIA and SEAP-NA). With statistical adjustment for sampling, we compared GST-L1 serostatus to established HPV seropositivity correlates and incident cervical HPV infection using odds ratios. We further compared GST-L1 to VLP-ELISA using pair-wise agreement statistics and by defining alternate assay cutoffs. RESULTS: Odds of HPV16 GST-L1 seropositivity increased with enrollment age (OR = 1.20 per year, 95%CI 1.03-1.40) and lifetime number of sexual partners (OR = 2.06 per partner, 95%CI 1.49-2.83), with similar results for HPV18. GST-L1 seropositivity did not indicate protection from incident infection over 4 years of follow-up (HPV16 adjusted OR = 1.72, 95%CI 0.95-3.13; HPV18 adjusted OR = 0.38, 95%CI 0.12-1.23). Seroprevalence by GST-L1 (HPV16 and HPV18, respectively) was 5.0% and 5.2%, compared to 19.4% and 23.8% by VLP-ELISA, giving positive agreement of 39.2% and 20.8%. Lowering GST-L1 seropositivity cutoffs improved GST-L1/VLP-ELISA positive agreement to 68.6% (HPV16) and 61.5% (HPV18). CONCLUSIONS: Our data support GST-L1 as a marker of cumulative HPV infection, but not immune protection. At lower seropositivity cutoffs, GST-L1 better approximates VLP-ELISA.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Glutathione Transferase/blood , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Costa Rica , DNA, Viral/analysis , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Epidemiologic Studies , Female , Human papillomavirus 16 , Human papillomavirus 18 , Humans , Odds Ratio , Papillomavirus Infections/blood , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL