The prevalence of adverse reactions among individuals with three-dose COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Considering the adverse reactions to vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), some people, particularly the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions, are hesitant to be vaccinated. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of adverse reactions and provide direct evidence of vaccine safety, mainly for the elderly and people with underlying medical conditions, to receive COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: From 1st March to 30th April 2022, we conducted an online survey of people who had completed three doses of COVID-19 vaccination by convenience sampling. Adverse reaction rates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. In addition, conditional logistic regression was used to compare the differences in adverse reactions among the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions with the general population. RESULTS: A total of 3339 individuals were included in this study, of which 2335 (69.9%) were female, with an average age of 32.1 ± 11.4 years. The prevalence of adverse reactions after the first dose of inactivated vaccine was 24.6% (23.1-26.2%), 19.2% (17.8-20.7%) for the second dose, and 19.1% (17.7-20.6%) for the booster dose; among individuals using messenger RNA vaccines, the prevalence was 42.7% (32.3-53.6%) for the first dose, 47.2% (36.5-58.1%) for the second dose, and 46.1% (35.4-57.0%) for the booster dose. Compared with the general population, the prevalence of adverse events did not differ in individuals with underlying medical conditions and those aged 60 and above. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with underlying medical conditions and those aged 60 and above, the prevalence of adverse reactions is similar to that of the general population, which provides a scientific basis regarding vaccination safety for these populations.

Characterization and determinant factors of critical illness and in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients: A retrospective cohort of 1,792 patients in Kenya.

Limited data is available on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), critical illness rate, and in-hospital mortality in the African setting. This study investigates determinants of critical illness and in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients in Kenya. We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH) in Kenya. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard regression were employed to determine predictor factors for intensive care unit (ICU) admission and in-hospital mortality, respectively. In addition, the Kaplan-Meier model was used to compare the survival times using log-rank tests. As a result, 346 (19.3%) COVID-19 patients were admitted to ICU, and 271 (15.1%) died. The majority of those admitted to the hospital were male, 1,137 (63.4%) and asymptomatic, 1,357 (75.7%). The most prevalent clinical features were shortness of breath, fever, and dry cough. In addition, older age, male, health status, patient on oxygen (O2), oxygen saturation levels (SPO2), headache, dry cough, comorbidities, obesity, cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), diabetes, chronic lung disease (CLD), and malignancy/cancer can predicate the risk of ICU admission, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-0.92). Survival analysis indicated 271 (15.1%) patients died and identified older age, male, headache, shortness of breath, health status, patient on oxygen, SPO2, headache, comorbidity, CVDs, diabetes, CLD, malignancy/cancer, and smoking as risk factors for mortality (AUC-ROC: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.89-0.91). This is the first attempt to explore predictors for ICU admission and hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients in Kenya.

Population-Based Incidence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome During Mass Immunization With Viral Vaccines: A Pooled Analysis.

Misunderstanding temporal coincidence of adverse events during mass vaccination and invalid assessment of possible safety concerns have negative effects on immunization programs, leading to low immunization coverage. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the incidence rates of GBS that are temporally associated with viral vaccine administration but might not be attributable to the vaccines. By literature search in Embase and PubMed, we included 48 publications and 2,110,441,600 participants. The pooled incidence rate of GBS was 3.09 per million persons (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.67 to 3.51) within six weeks of vaccination, equally 2.47 per 100,000 person-year (95%CI: 2.14 to 2.81). Subgroup analyses illustrated that the pooled rates were 2.77 per million persons (95%CI: 2.47 to 3.07) for individuals who received the influenza vaccine and 2.44 per million persons (95%CI: 0.97 to 3.91) for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, respectively. Our findings evidence the GBS-associated safety of virus vaccines. We present a reference for the evaluation of post-vaccination GBS rates in mass immunization campaigns, including the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

Causal associations between COVID-19 and atrial fibrillation: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Observational studies showed that coronavirus disease (2019) (COVID-19) attacks universally and its most menacing progression uniquely endangers the elderly with cardiovascular disease (CVD). The causal association between COVID-19 infection or its severity and susceptibility of atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: The bidirectional causal relationship between COVID-19 (including COVID-19, hospitalized COVID-19 compared with not hospitalized COVID-19, hospitalized COVID-19 compared with the general population, and severe COVID-19) and AF are determined by using two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. Genetically predicted severe COVID-19 was not significantly associated with the risk of AF [odds ratio (OR), 1.037; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.005-1.071; P = 0.023, q = 0.115]. In addition, genetically predicted AF was also not causally associated with severe COVID-19 (OR, 0.993; 95% CI, 0.888-1.111; P = 0.905, q = 0.905). There was no evidence to support the association between genetically determined COVID-19 and the risk of AF (OR, 1.111; 95% CI, 0.971-1.272; P = 0.127, q = 0.318), and vice versa (OR, 1.016; 95% CI, 0.976-1.058; P = 0.430, q = 0.851). Besides, no significant association was observed for hospitalized COVID-19 with AF. MR-Egger analysis indicated no evidence of directional pleiotropy. CONCLUSION: Overall, this MR study provides no clear evidence that COVID-19 is causally associated with the risk of AF.

Profile of Immunoglobulin G N-Glycome in COVID-19 Patients: A Case-Control Study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a major health challenge globally. Previous studies have suggested that changes in the glycosylation of IgG are closely associated with the severity of COVID-19. This study aimed to compare the profiles of IgG N-glycome between COVID-19 patients and healthy controls. A case-control study was conducted, in which 104 COVID-19 patients and 104 age- and sex-matched healthy individuals were recruited. Serum IgG N-glycome composition was analyzed by hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography with the ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) approach. COVID-19 patients have a decreased level of IgG fucosylation, which upregulates antibody-dependent cell cytotoxicity (ADCC) in acute immune responses. In severe cases, a low level of IgG sialylation contributes to the ADCC-regulated enhancement of inflammatory cytokines. The decreases in sialylation and galactosylation play a role in COVID-19 pathogenesis via the activation of the lectin-initiated alternative complement pathway. IgG N-glycosylation underlines the complex clinical phenotypes of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

All around suboptimal health - a joint position paper of the Suboptimal Health Study Consortium and European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine.

First two decades of the twenty-first century are characterised by epidemics of non-communicable diseases such as many hundreds of millions of patients diagnosed with cardiovascular diseases and the type 2 diabetes mellitus, breast, lung, liver and prostate malignancies, neurological, sleep, mood and eye disorders, amongst others. Consequent socio-economic burden is tremendous. Unprecedented decrease in age of maladaptive individuals has been reported. The absolute majority of expanding non-communicable disorders carry a chronic character, over a couple of years progressing from reversible suboptimal health conditions to irreversible severe pathologies and cascading collateral complications. The time-frame between onset of SHS and clinical manifestation of associated disorders is the operational area for an application of reliable risk assessment tools and predictive diagnostics followed by the cost-effective targeted prevention and treatments tailored to the person. This article demonstrates advanced strategies in bio/medical sciences and healthcare focused on suboptimal health conditions in the frame-work of Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (3PM/PPPM). Potential benefits in healthcare systems and for society at large include but are not restricted to an improved life-quality of major populations and socio-economical groups, advanced professionalism of healthcare-givers and sustainable healthcare economy. Amongst others, following medical areas are proposed to strongly benefit from PPPM strategies applied to the identification and treatment of suboptimal health conditions:Stress overload associated pathologiesMale and female healthPlanned pregnanciesPeriodontal healthEye disordersInflammatory disorders, wound healing and pain management with associated complicationsMetabolic disorders and suboptimal body weightCardiovascular pathologiesCancersStroke, particularly of unknown aetiology and in young individualsSleep medicineSports medicineImproved individual outcomes under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19.

Prevention of dementia using mobile phone applications (PRODEMOS): protocol for an international randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Profiles of high risk for future dementia are well understood and are likely to concern mostly those in low-income and middle-income countries and people at greater disadvantage in high-income countries. Approximately 30%-40% of dementia cases have been estimated to be attributed to modifiable risk factors, including hypertension, smoking and sedentary lifestyle. Tailored interventions targeting these risk factors can potentially prevent or delay the onset of dementia. Mobile health (mHealth) improves accessibility of such prevention strategies in hard-to-reach populations while at the same time tailoring such approaches. In the current study, we will investigate the effectiveness and implementation of a coach-supported mHealth intervention, targeting dementia risk factors, to reduce dementia risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The prevention of dementia using mobile phone applications (PRODEMOS) randomised controlled trial will follow an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design, taking place in the UK and China. People are eligible if they are 55-75 years old, of low socioeconomic status (UK) or from the general population (China); have ≥2 dementia risk factors; and own a smartphone. 2400 participants will be randomised to either a coach-supported, interactive mHealth platform, facilitating self-management of dementia risk factors, or a static control platform. The intervention and follow-up period will be 18 months. The primary effectiveness outcome is change in the previously validated Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Ageing and Incidence of Dementia dementia risk score. The main secondary outcomes include improvement of individual risk factors and cost-effectiveness. Implementation outcomes include acceptability, adoption, feasibility and sustainability of the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The PRODEMOS trial is sponsored in the UK by the University of Cambridge and is granted ethical approval by the London-Brighton and Sussex Research Ethics Committee (reference: 20/LO/01440). In China, the trial is approved by the medical ethics committees of Capital Medical University, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Beijing Geriatric Hospital, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Taishan Medical University and Xuanwu Hospital. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15986016.