Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(41): e27418, 2021 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501202


ABSTRACT: The occurrence of COVID-19 pandemic had a significant negative effect on health care systems over the last year. Health care providers were forced to focus mainly on COVID-19 patients, neglecting in many cases equally important diseases, both acute and chronic. Therefore, also screening and diagnostic strategies for HIV could have been significantly impaired.This retrospective, multicenter, observational study aimed at assessing the number and characteristics of new HIV/AIDS diagnoses during COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and compared characteristics of people living with HIV at diagnosis between pre- and post-COVID-19 era (2019 vs 2020).Our results showed a significant reduction of HIV diagnoses during pandemic. By contrast, people living with HIV during pandemic were older and were diagnosed in earlier stage of disease (considering CD4+ T cell count) compared to those who were diagnosed the year before. Moreover, there was a significant decrease of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men, probably for the impact of social distancing and restriction applied by the Italian Government. Late presentation incidence, if numbers in 2020 were lower than those in 2019, is still an issue.Routinely performing HIV testing in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection is identifying and linking to care underdiagnosed people living with HIV earlier. Thus, combined tests (HIV and SARS-CoV-2) should be implemented in patients with SARS-CoV-2 symptoms overlapping HIV's ones. Lastly, our results lastly showed how urgent implementation of a national policy for HIV screening is necessary.

Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Adult , CD4 Lymphocyte Count/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Mass Screening/organization & administration , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
Healthcare (Basel) ; 9(4)2021 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1167478


The BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, consisting of mRNA, have recently become available. The absolute novelty of these vaccines introduces questions about their safety and efficacy, especially in patients who are treated with biological drugs in dermatology. The aim of our review was to provide a broad overview of the current use of all available vaccinations in concomitance with biological therapy and to suggest indications for the new mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. We conducted a narrative review of the literature regarding the indications and safety of the various types of vaccines currently available in dermatological patients treated with biological therapy. The safety and efficacy of administering inactivated vaccines in patients undergoing biological therapy with inhibitors of TNF-α, IL-17, IL-12/23, and IL-4/13 was confirmed. Inactivated vaccines can be administered during therapy with inhibitors of IL-23 and IgE, taking into account that the level of evidence is lower due to the lack of specific studies. Live attenuated vaccines were contraindicated in concomitance with all biological therapies considered, except omalizumab. According to this evidence, we assume that there are currently no contraindications to the administration of the new Covid-19 BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines during biological therapy with inhibitors of TNF-α, IL-17, IL-12/23, IL-23, and IL-4/13, since these vaccines are comparable to inactivated ones. For patients with chronic urticaria or allergic asthma treated with omalizumab, we currently recommend caution in using the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines (30 min observation). The only contraindications were a previous history of hypersensitivity to the Covid-19 vaccines themself or to their excipients. In conclusion, further randomized clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of the antibody response in these patients.