Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob ; 21(1): 32, 2022 Jul 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: New vaccines are being developed to fight the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In our study we compared the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines to prevent COVID-19-related infections and mortality. METHODS: 17 randomized clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines were included after search in databases. We compared COVID-19 vaccines based on symptomatic and severe infections, number of deaths and hospitalizations related to COVID-19. Also, we analyzed the efficacy of COVID-19 against different variants of SARS-CoV-2 as well as according to different age groups. Random effects model using Mantel-Haenzeal method was used to pool relative risk (RR). RESULTS: Our meta-analysis shows that full vaccination could decrease not only the risk of symptomatic or severe COVID-19, the risk of hospitalization and death caused by COVID-19. COVID-19 vaccines were also effective against variants of SARS-CoV-2 (RR = 0.36; 95% CI [0.25; 0.53], p < 0.0001). However, efficacy of vaccination varied in COVID-19 variant-dependent manner. Moreover, the analysis in different age groups showed that COVID-19 vaccines had the similar results: the risk was slightly lower in adults compared to elderly cohort [Formula: see text] 65 years): (RR = 0.16, 95% CI [0.11; 0.23]) and (RR = 0.19, 95% CI [0.12; 0.30]), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Data obtained from clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines looks promising, in order to fully investigate efficacy of the vaccines further clinical examination is required especially considering new SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccination
2.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 2088, 2022 11 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117815

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused increased mortality worldwide. We noticed a tendency for higher number of deaths in Eastern European countries. Therefore, we decided to investigate whether any common factor that might be responsible for the increased COVID-19 mortality exists. METHODS: In our cross-sectional study, we conducted the correlation and multiple regression analysis using R basing on the data gathered in publicly available databases. In the analysis, we included variables such as: number of deaths, number of new cases, number of hospitalizations, number of ICU (intensive care units) patients, number of vaccinations, number of boosters, number of fully vaccinated individuals, stringency index, number of reported COVID-19 variant cases, and number of flights. Additionally, we analyzed the influence of population density and median age in particular European countries on total number of COVID-19 deaths. Analyzed data represents periods from start of the COVID-19 pandemic in particular Eastern European Countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, while as the end of the study the day of January 31, 2022 is considered. Results were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Our study showed that mortality rate reflects the number of COVID-19 cases (e.g. for Poland was 0.0058, p < 0.001), number of hospitalized patients (e.g. for Poland 0.0116, p < 0.001), and patients in intensive care (e.g. for Slovakia 0.2326, p < 0.001). Stringency index corresponding to level of introduced restrictions and vaccination can affect the mortality rate of COVID-19 in a country-dependent manner: e.g. for Romania 0.0006, p < 0.001; whereas in Lithuania - 0.0002, p < 0.001. Moreover, occurrence of B.1.1.7 and B.1.617.2 variants increased COVID-19 mortality rates. CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that crucial factor for decreasing mortality is proper healthcare joined by accurate restriction policy. Additionally, our study shows that COVID-19 vaccination proven successful in COVID-19 mortality prevention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines , Pandemics
3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(19)2022 Oct 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2066007

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic still goes on. The increasing number of COVID-19 cases has been observed since the start of summer 2022, although this was not in summer 2021. Therefore, we would like to compare factors that were responsible for this trend in five selected countries in the European Union (Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Austria and Germany) using the data from publicly available databases for the analyzed period of weeks 22-30 in 2021 and 2022. The multiple factor analysis was conducted in R, using mean or median score. Our cross-sectional study showed that analyzed countries had similar profiles in 2021 characterized by restrictions and health system policies, as well as B.1.351, B.1.1.7, B.1.617.2 and P.1 variants. Similarly, these countries had similar profiles in 2022, but described by other variables: number of new COVID-19 cases per million, number people fully vaccinated per hundred, number of total boosters administered per hundred and also occurrence of Omicron variant and its sub-lineages. Although the COVID-19 vaccination rate is relatively high in the European Union, during the summer of 2022, the number of COVID-19 cases sharply increased daily, which seems to be connected with the presence of the Omicron variant and its sub-lineages.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics
4.
Oxid Med Cell Longev ; 2022: 5589089, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736165

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic caused relatively high mortality in patients, especially in those with concomitant diseases (i.e., diabetes, hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)). In most of aforementioned comorbidities, the oxidative stress appears to be an important player in their pathogenesis. The direct cause of death in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is still far from being elucidated. Although some preliminary data suggests that the lung vasculature injury and the loss of the functioning part of pulmonary alveolar population are crucial, the precise mechanism is still unclear. On the other hand, at least two classes of medications used with some clinical benefits in COVID-19 treatment seem to have a major influence on ROS (reactive oxygen species) and RNS (reactive nitrogen species) production. However, oxidative stress is one of the important mechanisms in the antiviral immune response and innate immunity. Therefore, it would be of interest to summarize the data regarding the oxidative stress in severe COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the role of oxidative and antioxidant mechanisms in severe COVID-19 based on available studies. We also present the role of ROS and RNS in other viral infections in humans and in animal models. Although reactive oxygen and nitrogen species play an important role in the innate antiviral immune response, in some situations, they might have a deleterious effect, e.g., in some coronaviral infections. The understanding of the redox mechanisms in severe COVID-19 disease may have an impact on its treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Oxidative Stress/immunology , Antioxidants/pharmacology , Antioxidants/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/immunology , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/metabolism , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/metabolism , Humans , Immunity, Innate , Oxidative Stress/drug effects , Reactive Nitrogen Species/immunology , Reactive Nitrogen Species/metabolism , Reactive Oxygen Species/immunology , Reactive Oxygen Species/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
5.
Clin Mol Allergy ; 20(1): 1, 2022 Jan 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1637886

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A serious allergic reaction that may occur in response to medical products is anaphylaxis, which potentially can lead to anaphylactic shock. In the light of recent COVID-19 pandemic, much public attention had been paid to the severe allergic reactions occurring after COVID-19 vaccination. Therefore, in our study we would like to investigate the risk of authorized COVID-19 vaccines to induce anaphylactic reaction, anaphylactoid reaction, anaphylactic shock and anaphylactoid shock. METHODS: We searched databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science and Embase and found eight articles about the incidence of anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions. Also, we used data from four databases from Canada, the U.S., the European Union and the United Kingdom. To calculate effect sizes, we used random effects model with inverse variance method. The risk ratio with 95% confidence interval were used for dichotomous outcomes. Statistical analysis was prepared in R. Results were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The most cases of anaphylactic reaction, anaphylactoid reaction, anaphylactic shock and anaphylactoid shock were reported in female aged 18-85 years after BNT162b2 vaccine according to data from the EU. Analyzed COVID-19 vaccines can cause the anaphylaxis/anaphylactic reaction with risk of 106.99 (95% CI [39.95; 286.57], p < 0.0001, I2 = 59%), whereas the anaphylactoid reaction, anaphylactic and anaphylactoid shocks with risk of 113.3 (95% CI [28.11; 456.53], p < 0.0001), 344.2 (95% CI [85.77; 1381.39], p < 0.0001), 14.9, 95% CI [1.96; 112.79], p = 0.009), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis shows that the risk of anaphylactic reaction, anaphylactoid reaction, anaphylactic shock and anaphylactoid shock do not occur only after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, vaccination centers should be prepared to render assistance in the event of a reaction in all cases.

6.
Expert Rev Clin Immunol ; 17(6): 619-627, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191660

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the medical community has faced major challenges that affect disease management in all areas. Dermatologists and immunologists have to choose appropriate treatment strategy taking into consideration the risk of infection and possible exacerbation of the course of the disease in patients with confirmed infection. Management of atopic dermatitis (AD) in moderate to severe cases is based on systemic therapy such as cyclosporine, azathioprine, methotrexate and dupilumab.Areas covered: A literature search in PubMed database was performed until 6 March 2021. In this review, the authors discuss non-biologic and biologic systemic medications for AD and provide an overview of therapeutic recommendations during COVID-19 pandemic.Expert opinion: In case of an active COVID-19 infection, conventional systemic treatment and biological treatment needs to be stopped until clinical recovery. Noninfected patients with systemic treatment of AD should continue their therapy via self-application. The authors can conclude that understanding of dupilumab therapy is better recognized in context AD treatment during COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to cyclosporine, azathioprine and methotrexate. However, this systemic immunosuppressants still require further investigation and literature complementation.


Subject(s)
Biological Products/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Biological Products/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Atopic/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Atopic/immunology , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL