Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 9 de 9
Filtrar
1.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 29(1): 184-188, 2023 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36454718

RESUMEN

Since June 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation (SIREN) study has conducted routine PCR testing in UK healthcare workers and sequenced PCR-positive samples. SIREN detected increases in infections and reinfections and delected Omicron subvariant waves emergence contemporaneous with national surveillance. SIREN's sentinel surveillance methods can be used for variant surveillance.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Animales , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Personal de Salud , Reinfección , Urodelos
2.
Lancet ; 397(10283): 1459-1469, 2021 04 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33844963

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection. METHODS: A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts. FINDINGS: From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days. INTERPRETATION: A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals. FUNDING: Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/inmunología , Personal de Salud , Adulto , Infecciones Asintomáticas , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , Inglaterra , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias , Estudios Prospectivos , Reinfección , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Lancet ; 397(10286): 1725-1735, 2021 05 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33901423

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 adenoviral vector vaccines have been rapidly rolled out in the UK from December, 2020. We aimed to determine the factors associated with vaccine coverage for both vaccines and documented the vaccine effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in a cohort of health-care workers undergoing regular asymptomatic testing. METHODS: The SIREN study is a prospective cohort study among staff (aged ≥18 years) working in publicly-funded hospitals in the UK. Participants were assigned into either the positive cohort (antibody positive or history of infection [indicated by previous positivity of antibody or PCR tests]) or the negative cohort (antibody negative with no previous positive test) at the beginning of the follow-up period. Baseline risk factors were collected at enrolment, symptom status was collected every 2 weeks, and vaccination status was collected through linkage to the National Immunisations Management System and questionnaires. Participants had fortnightly asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing and monthly antibody testing, and all tests (including symptomatic testing) outside SIREN were captured. Data cutoff for this analysis was Feb 5, 2021. The follow-up period was Dec 7, 2020, to Feb 5, 2021. The primary outcomes were vaccinated participants (binary ever vacinated variable; indicated by at least one vaccine dose recorded by at least one of the two vaccination data sources) for the vaccine coverage analysis and SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a PCR test for the vaccine effectiveness analysis. We did a mixed-effect logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with vaccine coverage. We used a piecewise exponential hazard mixed-effects model (shared frailty-type model) using a Poisson distribution to calculate hazard ratios to compare time-to-infection in unvaccinated and vaccinated participants and estimate the impact of the BNT162b2 vaccine on all PCR-positive infections (asymptomatic and symptomatic). This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN11041050, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: 23 324 participants from 104 sites (all in England) met the inclusion criteria for this analysis and were enrolled. Included participants had a median age of 46·1 years (IQR 36·0-54·1) and 19 692 (84%) were female; 8203 (35%) were assigned to the positive cohort at the start of the analysis period, and 15 121 (65%) assigned to the negative cohort. Total follow-up time was 2 calendar months and 1 106 905 person-days (396 318 vaccinated and 710 587 unvaccinated). Vaccine coverage was 89% on Feb 5, 2021, 94% of whom had BNT162b2 vaccine. Significantly lower coverage was associated with previous infection, gender, age, ethnicity, job role, and Index of Multiple Deprivation score. During follow-up, there were 977 new infections in the unvaccinated cohort, an incidence density of 14 infections per 10 000 person-days; the vaccinated cohort had 71 new infections 21 days or more after their first dose (incidence density of eight infections per 10 000 person-days) and nine infections 7 days after the second dose (incidence density four infections per 10 000 person-days). In the unvaccinated cohort, 543 (56%) participants had typical COVID-19 symptoms and 140 (14%) were asymptomatic on or 14 days before their PCR positive test date, compared with 29 (36%) with typical COVID-19 symptoms and 15 (19%) asymptomatic in the vaccinated cohort. A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine showed vaccine effectiveness of 70% (95% CI 55-85) 21 days after first dose and 85% (74-96) 7 days after two doses in the study population. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that the BNT162b2 vaccine can prevent both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection in working-age adults. This cohort was vaccinated when the dominant variant in circulation was B1.1.7 and shows effectiveness against this variant. FUNDING: Public Health England, UK Department of Health and Social Care, and the National Institute for Health Research.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/provisión & distribución , Personal de Salud , Enfermedades Profesionales/prevención & control , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , ARN Mensajero , Vacuna BNT162 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Estudios de Cohortes , Inglaterra , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Euro Surveill ; 25(11)2020 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32209165

RESUMEN

BackgroundDiphtheria is a potentially fatal disease caused by toxigenic strains of Corynebacterium diphtheriae, C. ulcerans or C. pseudotuberculosis.AimOur objective was to review the epidemiology of diphtheria in the United Kingdom (UK) and the impact of recent changes in public health management and surveillance.MethodsPutative human toxigenic diphtheria isolates in the UK are sent for species confirmation and toxigenicity testing to the National Reference Laboratory. Clinical, epidemiological and microbiological information for toxigenic cases between 2009 and 2017 are described in this population-based prospective surveillance study.ResultsThere were 33 toxigenic cases of diphtheria aged 4 to 82 years. Causative species were C. diphtheriae (n = 18) and C. ulcerans (n = 15). Most C. diphtheriae cases were cutaneous (14/18) while more than half of C. ulcerans cases had respiratory presentations (8/15). Two thirds (23/33) of cases were inadequately immunised. Two cases with C. ulcerans infections died, both inadequately immunised. The major risk factor for C. diphtheriae aquisition was travel to an endemic area and for C. ulcerans, contact with a companion animal. Most confirmed C. diphtheriae or C. ulcerans isolates (441/507; 87%) submitted for toxigenicity testing were non-toxigenic, however, toxin positivity rates were higher (15/23) for C. ulcerans than C. diphtheriae (18/469). Ten non-toxigenic toxin gene-bearing (NTTB) C. diphtheriae were also detected.ConclusionDiphtheria is a rare disease in the UK. In the last decade, milder cutaneous C. diphtheriae cases have become more frequent. Incomplete vaccination status was strongly associated with the risk of hospitalisation and death.


Asunto(s)
Corynebacterium diphtheriae/aislamiento & purificación , Corynebacterium/genética , Toxina Diftérica/metabolismo , Difteria/epidemiología , Vigilancia en Salud Pública/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Animales , Niño , Preescolar , Corynebacterium/clasificación , Corynebacterium/aislamiento & purificación , Infecciones por Corynebacterium/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Corynebacterium/epidemiología , Difteria/diagnóstico , Difteria/microbiología , Toxoide Diftérico/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tipificación de Secuencias Multilocus , Vigilancia de la Población , Estudios Prospectivos , Administración en Salud Pública , Viaje , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
5.
J Infect ; 85(5): 545-556, 2022 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36089104

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To investigate serological differences between SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases and contemporary controls, to identify antibody correlates of protection against reinfection. METHODS: We performed a case-control study, comparing reinfection cases with singly infected individuals pre-vaccination, matched by gender, age, region and timing of first infection. Serum samples were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S), anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-N), live virus microneutralisation (LV-N) and pseudovirus microneutralisation (PV-N). Results were analysed using fixed effect linear regression and fitted into conditional logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 23 cases and 92 controls. First infections occurred before November 2020; reinfections occurred before February 2021, pre-vaccination. Anti-S levels, LV-N and PV-N titres were significantly lower among cases; no difference was found for anti-N levels. Increasing anti-S levels were associated with reduced risk of reinfection (OR 0·63, CI 0·47-0·85), but no association for anti-N levels (OR 0·88, CI 0·73-1·05). Titres >40 were correlated with protection against reinfection for LV-N Wuhan (OR 0·02, CI 0·001-0·31) and LV-N Alpha (OR 0·07, CI 0·009-0·62). For PV-N, titres >100 were associated with protection against Wuhan (OR 0·14, CI 0·03-0·64) and Alpha (0·06, CI 0·008-0·40). CONCLUSIONS: Before vaccination, protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was directly correlated with anti-S levels, PV-N and LV-N titres, but not with anti-N levels. Detectable LV-N titres were sufficient for protection, whilst PV-N titres >100 were required for a protective effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11041050.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Humanos , Reinfección/prevención & control , Vacunación
6.
J Infect ; 83(2): 167-174, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34146598

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility and impact of nanopore-based 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Np16S) service on antibiotic treatment for acute severe pneumonia on the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Speciation and sequencing accuracy of Np16S on isolates with bioinformatics pipeline optimisation, followed by technical evaluation including quality checks and clinical-reporting criteria analysing stored respiratory samples using single-sample flow cells. Pilot service comparing Np16S results with all routine respiratory tests and impact on same-day antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS: Np16S correctly identified 140/167 (84%) isolates after 1h sequencing and passed quality control criteria including reproducibility and limit-of-detection. Sequencing of 108 stored respiratory samples showed concordance with routine culture in 80.5% of cases and established technical and clinical reporting criteria. A 10-week same-day pilot Np16S service analysed 45 samples from 37 patients with suspected community (n=15) or hospital acquired (n=30) pneumonia. Np16S showed concordance compared with all routine culture or molecular tests for 27 (82%) of 33 positive samples. It identified the causative pathogen in 32/33 (97%) samples and contributed to antimicrobial treatment changes for 30 patients (67%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates feasibility of providing a routine same-day nanopore sequencing service that makes a significant contribution to early antibiotic prescribing for bacterial pneumonia in the ICU.


Asunto(s)
Nanoporos , Genes de ARNr , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , ARN Ribosómico 16S/genética , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
7.
Clin Med (Lond) ; 17(4): 332-337, 2017 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28765409

RESUMEN

The West African Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic was the largest and most devastating outbreak of EVD the world has ever seen. Its impact was felt far from the shores of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, with public health systems and clinicians across the globe confronted with an international response both in the affected region and within their own borders. The UK had a prominent role in response efforts, particularly in Sierra Leone. This article highlights how UK academic, health service, military, commercial and public health professionals all played a significant role both at home and abroad.


Asunto(s)
Epidemias , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Planificación en Desastres , Humanos , Sierra Leona , Reino Unido
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda