Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(4): ofad172, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2299245

ABSTRACT

Background: Despite the disproportionate morbidity and mortality experienced by American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) persons during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, few studies have reported vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates among these communities. Methods: We conducted a test-negative case-control analysis among AI/AN persons aged ≥12 years presenting for care from January 1, 2021, through November 30, 2021, to evaluate the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against COVID-19-associated outpatient visits and hospitalizations. Cases and controls were patients with ≥1 symptom consistent with COVID-19-like illness; cases were defined as those test-positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and controls were defined as those test-negative for SARS-CoV-2. We used unconditional multivariable logistic regression to estimate VE, defined as 1 minus the adjusted odds ratio for vaccination among cases vs controls. Results: The analysis included 207 cases and 267 test-negative controls. Forty-four percent of cases and 78% of controls received 2 doses of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. VE point estimates for 2 doses of mRNA vaccine were higher for hospitalized participants (94.6%; 95% CI, 88.0-97.6) than outpatient participants (86.5%; 95% CI, 63.0-95.0), but confidence intervals overlapped. Conclusions: Among AI/AN persons, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were highly effective in preventing COVID-associated outpatient visits and hospitalizations. Maintaining high vaccine coverage, including booster doses, will reduce the burden of disease in this population.

2.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 18(7): 2153538, 2022 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2151607

ABSTRACT

Vaccines are effective tools to prevent COVID-19-related morbidity. However, coverage is low throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Uptake of public health measures, perceptions of COVID-19 illness and vaccines, and intention to vaccinate were evaluated in 2021-2022 in rural Zambia. Adherence to public health measures, perceptions of COVID-19 risk and severity, and vaccine acceptance increased significantly over time, particularly in December 2021, coinciding with the fourth pandemic wave and relaunch of the national vaccine campaign. Vaccine acceptance was associated with perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness, but not disease severity. These findings highlight the importance of strong pandemic response and public communication for increased uptake of mitigatory measures, including vaccine acceptance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Public Health , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Zambia/epidemiology , Vaccination
3.
Viruses ; 14(9)2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1997812

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOCs) have significantly impacted the global epidemiology of the pandemic. From December 2020 to April 2022, we conducted genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in the Southern Province of Zambia, a region that shares international borders with Botswana, Namibia, and Zimbabwe and is a major tourist destination. Genetic analysis of 40 SARS-CoV-2 whole genomes revealed the circulation of Alpha (B.1.1.7), Beta (B.1.351), Delta (AY.116), and multiple Omicron subvariants with the BA.1 subvariant being predominant. Whereas Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants were associated with the second, third, and fourth pandemic waves, respectively, the Alpha variant was not associated with any wave in the country. Phylogenetic analysis showed evidence of local transmission and possible multiple introductions of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs in Zambia from different European and African countries. Across the 40 genomes analysed, a total of 292 mutations were observed, including 182 missense mutations, 66 synonymous mutations, 23 deletions, 9 insertions, 1 stop codon, and 11 mutations in the non-coding region. This study stresses the need for the continued monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 circulation in Zambia, particularly in strategically positioned regions such as the Southern Province which could be at increased risk of introduction of novel VOCs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Codon, Terminator , Genomics , Humans , Mutation , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Zambia/epidemiology
4.
Trop Med Int Health ; 27(7): 647-654, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1861557

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions were implemented globally to control the virus. Data on respiratory pathogens in sub-Saharan Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic are scarce. This analysis was conducted to evaluate patterns of respiratory pathogens in rural Zambia before and during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Surveillance was established in December 2018 at Macha Hospital in southern Zambia. Patients with respiratory symptoms in the outpatient and inpatient clinics were recruited. Nasopharyngeal samples were collected and tested for respiratory pathogens. The prevalence of respiratory symptoms and pathogens was evaluated and compared in the first (December 10, 2018-December 9, 2019) and second (December 10, 2019-November 30, 2020) years of surveillance. RESULTS: Outpatient visits and admissions for respiratory illness significantly decreased from the first to second year, especially among children. SARS-CoV-2 was not detected from any participants in Year 2. Among outpatients and inpatients with respiratory symptoms, the prevalence of respiratory syncytial virus and influenza viruses decreased from the first to second year. In contrast, the prevalence of rhinovirus/enterovirus, metapneumovirus and parainfluenza virus increased. CONCLUSIONS: The epidemiology of respiratory viruses in rural Zambia changed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that public health interventions may have had an impact on the introduction and circulation of respiratory pathogens in this area.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Viruses , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Humans , Pandemics , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Zambia/epidemiology
5.
N Engl J Med ; 386(18): 1700-1711, 2022 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1768967

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Polyclonal convalescent plasma may be obtained from donors who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). The efficacy of this plasma in preventing serious complications in outpatients with recent-onset Covid-19 is uncertain. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of Covid-19 convalescent plasma, as compared with control plasma, in symptomatic adults (≥18 years of age) who had tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, regardless of their risk factors for disease progression or vaccination status. Participants were enrolled within 8 days after symptom onset and received a transfusion within 1 day after randomization. The primary outcome was Covid-19-related hospitalization within 28 days after transfusion. RESULTS: Participants were enrolled from June 3, 2020, through October 1, 2021. A total of 1225 participants underwent randomization, and 1181 received a transfusion. In the prespecified modified intention-to-treat analysis that included only participants who received a transfusion, the primary outcome occurred in 17 of 592 participants (2.9%) who received convalescent plasma and 37 of 589 participants (6.3%) who received control plasma (absolute risk reduction, 3.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 5.8; P = 0.005), which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 54%. Evidence of efficacy in vaccinated participants cannot be inferred from these data because 53 of the 54 participants with Covid-19 who were hospitalized were unvaccinated and 1 participant was partially vaccinated. A total of 16 grade 3 or 4 adverse events (7 in the convalescent-plasma group and 9 in the control-plasma group) occurred in participants who were not hospitalized. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with Covid-19, most of whom were unvaccinated, the administration of convalescent plasma within 9 days after the onset of symptoms reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization. (Funded by the Department of Defense and others; CSSC-004 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04373460.).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Immunization, Passive , Adult , Ambulatory Care , COVID-19/therapy , Disease Progression , Double-Blind Method , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Passive/adverse effects , Immunization, Passive/methods , Treatment Outcome , United States , COVID-19 Serotherapy
6.
Int J Infect Dis ; 102: 291-298, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-893936

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The role of respiratory co-infections in modulating disease severity remains understudied in southern Africa, particularly in rural areas. This study was performed to characterize the spectrum of respiratory pathogens in rural southern Zambia and the prognostic impact of co-infections. METHODS: Respiratory specimens collected from inpatient and outpatient participants in a viral surveillance program in 2018-2019 were tested for selected viruses and atypical bacteria using the Xpert Xpress Flu/RSV assay and FilmArray Respiratory Panel EZ. Participants were followed for 3-5 weeks to assess their clinical course. Multivariable regression was used to examine the role of co-infections in influencing disease severity. RESULTS: A respiratory pathogen was detected in 63.2% of samples from 671 participants who presented with influenza-like illness. Common pathogens identified included influenza virus (18.2% of samples), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (11.8%), rhinovirus (26.4%), and coronavirus (6.0%). Overall, 6.4% of participants were co-infected with multiple respiratory pathogens. Compared to mono-infections, co-infections were found not to be associated with severe clinical illness either overall (relative risk (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-1.32) or specifically with influenza virus (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.14-4.46) or RSV infections (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.17-1.11). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory infections in rural southern Zambia were associated with a wide range of viruses. Respiratory co-infections in this population were not associated with clinical severity.


Subject(s)
Coinfection/virology , Respiratory Tract Infections/virology , Virus Diseases/virology , Viruses/isolation & purification , Adolescent , Adult , Biodiversity , Child , Child, Preschool , Coinfection/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Virus Diseases/epidemiology , Viruses/classification , Viruses/genetics , Young Adult , Zambia/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL