Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Intern Med J ; 2023 Apr 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2304665

ABSTRACT

Infection remains a significant contributor to morbidity and mortality in patients with myeloma. This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary group of clinicians who specialise in the management of patients with myeloma and infection from the medical and scientific advisory group from Myeloma Australia and the National Centre for Infections in Cancer. In addition to summarising the current epidemiology and risk factors for infection in patients with myeloma, this guideline provides recommendations that address three key areas in the prevention of infection: screening for latent infection, use of antimicrobial prophylaxis and immunoglobulin replacement and vaccination against leading respiratory infections (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, influenza and Streptococcus pneumoniae) and other preventable infections. This guideline provides a practical approach to the prevention of infection in patients with myeloma and harmonises the clinical approach to screening for infection, use of prophylaxis and vaccination to prevent infectious complications.

2.
Commun Dis Intell (2018) ; 472023 Jan 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2206063

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Healthcare facilities are high-risk settings for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the first large healthcare-associated outbreak within Australia occurred in Tasmania. Several operational research studies were conducted amongst workers from the implicated hospital campus, to learn more about COVID-19 transmission. Methods: Healthcare workers (HCWs) from the implicated hospital campus were invited to complete an online survey and participate in a serology study. Blood samples for serological testing were collected at approximately 12 weeks (round one) and eight months (round two) after the outbreak. A descriptive analysis was conducted of participant characteristics, serology results, and longevity of antibodies. Results: There were 261 HCWs in round one, of whom 44 (17%) were polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed outbreak cases; 129 of the 261 (49%) participated in round two, of whom 34 (27%) were outbreak cases. The prevalence of positive antibodies at round one was 15% (n = 38) and at round two was 12% (n = 15). There were 15 participants (12%) who were seropositive in both rounds, with a further 9% (n = 12) of round two participants having equivocal results after previously being seropositive. Six HCWs not identified as cases during the outbreak were seropositive in round one, with three still seropositive in round two. Of those who participated in both rounds, 68% (n = 88) were seronegative at both time points. Discussion: Our findings demonstrate that serological testing after this large healthcare-associated COVID-19 outbreak complemented the findings of earlier diagnostic testing, with evidence of additional infections to those diagnosed when use of PCR testing had been restricted. The results also provide evidence of persisting SARS-CoV-2 antibody response eight months after an outbreak in an unvaccinated population. The high proportion of HCWs who remained seronegative is consistent with low community transmission in Tasmania after this outbreak.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Tasmania/epidemiology , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Disease Outbreaks , Hospitals , Health Personnel
3.
Western Pac Surveill Response J ; 12(4): 1-9, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1638035

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We undertook an integrated analysis of genomic and epidemiological data to investigate a large health-care-associated outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to better understand the epidemiology of COVID-19 cases in Tasmania, Australia. METHODS: Epidemiological data collected on COVID-19 cases notified in Tasmania between 2 March and 15 May 2020, and positive samples of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or RNA extracted from the samples were included. Sequencing was conducted by tiled amplicon polymerase chain reaction with ARTIC v1 or v3 primers and Illumina sequencing. Consensus sequences were generated, sequences were aligned to a reference sequence and phylogenetic analysis was performed. Genomic clusters were determined and integrated with epidemiological data to provide additional information. RESULTS: All 231 COVID-19 cases notified in Tasmania during the study period and 266 SARS-CoV-2-positive samples, representing 217/231 (94%) notified cases, were included; 184/217 (84%) were clustered, 21/217 (10%) were unique and 12/217 (6%) could not be sequenced. Genomics confirmed the presence of seven clusters already identified through epidemiological links, clarified transmission networks in which the epidemiology had been unclear and identified one cluster that had not previously been recognized. DISCUSSION: Genomic analysis provided useful additional information on COVID-19 in Tasmania, including evidence of a large health-care-associated outbreak linked to an overseas cruise, the probable source of infection in cases with no previously identified epidemiological link and confirmation that there was no identified community transmission from other imported cases. Genomic insights are an important component of the response to COVID-19, and continuing genomic surveillance is warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Genomics , Humans , Phylogeny , Policy , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Tasmania/epidemiology
4.
Lancet Public Health ; 6(8): e547-e556, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1433979

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A cornerstone of Australia's ability to control COVID-19 has been effective border control with an extensive supervised quarantine programme. However, a rapid recrudescence of COVID-19 was observed in the state of Victoria in June, 2020. We aim to describe the genomic findings that located the source of this second wave and show the role of genomic epidemiology in the successful elimination of COVID-19 for a second time in Australia. METHODS: In this observational, genomic epidemiological study, we did genomic sequencing of all laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 diagnosed in Victoria, Australia between Jan 25, 2020, and Jan 31, 2021. We did phylogenetic analyses, genomic cluster discovery, and integrated results with epidemiological data (detailed information on demographics, risk factors, and exposure) collected via interview by the Victorian Government Department of Health. Genomic transmission networks were used to group multiple genomic clusters when epidemiological and genomic data suggested they arose from a single importation event and diversified within Victoria. To identify transmission of emergent lineages between Victoria and other states or territories in Australia, all publicly available SARS-CoV-2 sequences uploaded before Feb 11, 2021, were obtained from the national sequence sharing programme AusTrakka, and epidemiological data were obtained from the submitting laboratories. We did phylodynamic analyses to estimate the growth rate, doubling time, and number of days from the first local infection to the collection of the first sequenced genome for the dominant local cluster, and compared our growth estimates to previously published estimates from a similar growth phase of lineage B.1.1.7 (also known as the Alpha variant) in the UK. FINDINGS: Between Jan 25, 2020, and Jan 31, 2021, there were 20 451 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia, of which 15 431 were submitted for sequencing, and 11 711 met all quality control metrics and were included in our analysis. We identified 595 genomic clusters, with a median of five cases per cluster (IQR 2-11). Overall, samples from 11 503 (98·2%) of 11 711 cases clustered with another sample in Victoria, either within a genomic cluster or transmission network. Genomic analysis revealed that 10 426 cases, including 10 416 (98·4%) of 10 584 locally acquired cases, diagnosed during the second wave (between June and October, 2020) were derived from a single incursion from hotel quarantine, with the outbreak lineage (transmission network G, lineage D.2) rapidly detected in other Australian states and territories. Phylodynamic analyses indicated that the epidemic growth rate of the outbreak lineage in Victoria during the initial growth phase (samples collected between June 4 and July 9, 2020; 47·4 putative transmission events, per branch, per year [1/years; 95% credible interval 26·0-85·0]), was similar to that of other reported variants, such as B.1.1.7 in the UK (mean approximately 71·5 1/years). Strict interventions were implemented, and the outbreak lineage has not been detected in Australia since Oct 29, 2020. Subsequent cases represented independent international or interstate introductions, with limited local spread. INTERPRETATION: Our study highlights how rapid escalation of clonal outbreaks can occur from a single incursion. However, strict quarantine measures and decisive public health responses to emergent cases are effective, even with high epidemic growth rates. Real-time genomic surveillance can alter the way in which public health agencies view and respond to COVID-19 outbreaks. FUNDING: The Victorian Government, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, and the Medical Research Future Fund.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Epidemiologic Studies , Genomics , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Victoria/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL