Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Curr Pharmacol Rep ; : 1-11, 2023 May 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2326942

ABSTRACT

Purpose of overview: The constant surge in accessing essential medicines creates a greater need for continuous monitoring of usage. The inability to source active pharmaceutical ingredients during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in drug shortages that increased online requests for medications. E-commerce and social sites have opened the floodgate for the marketing of falsified, substandard, and unregistered pharmaceuticals, making them easily accessible to consumers with the click of a button. A high prevalence of such products with compromised quality highlights further the need for enhanced post-marketing vigilance of safety and quality within the pharmaceutical industry. This review aims to assess the extent to which pharmacovigilance (PV) systems in selected Caribbean countries conform to the minimum World Health Organization (WHO) requirements, highlight the importance of PV in ensuring the safer use of medicines across the Caribbean region, and identify opportunities and challenges in building comprehensive PV systems. Recent Findings: The review finds that while major advancements in PV and adverse drug reaction (ADR) monitoring have occurred in Europe and other parts of the Americas, little has been done in the Caribbean region. Only a few countries in the region are active members of the WHO's global PV network, and ADR reporting is minimal. The reason for low reporting includes a lack of awareness, commitment, and participation of healthcare professionals, manufacturers, authorized distributors, and the general consumers. Summary: Nearly all established national PV systems do not fully conform to the minimum PV requirements by the WHO. Legislation, regulatory framework, political commitment, adequate funding, strategies, and incentives to encourage reporting of ADRs are needed to build sustainable PV systems in the Caribbean.

2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(2)2023 Feb 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2238665

ABSTRACT

This study aims to evaluate the acceptance and risk perception of pregnant and non pregnant women towards COVID-19 vaccines using a cross-sectional matched-sample study approach. A web-based questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions was administered to adults older than 18 years in the sub-Saharan African (SSA) region. Respondents (n = 131) were grouped based on their pregnancy status (54 pregnant and 77 non pregnant women) and matched for comparison by age. The matched groups were compared using the chi-square test and the t-test where appropriate. Compared to non pregnant women, pregnant women reported significantly lower risk perception scores of COVID-19 infection (3.74 vs. 5.78, p < 0.001) and were less likely to take the COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.27, p < 0.001). A similar proportion of pregnant and non pregnant women believed in false information about the COVID-19 vaccine, and 40% of unvaccinated pregnant women (n = 40) were concerned about the safety of the vaccine. After adjustment, women's education, marital status, belief in misconceptions and risk perception were associated with non-vaccination among pregnant women. The content analysis revealed that pregnant women refused the vaccine due to mistrust of their countries' health systems, concerns about the country where the vaccines were manufactured and a lack of confidence in the production process of the vaccines. This study shows the poor acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women in SSA, who perceived a lower risk of COVID-19 infection. Understanding the reasons for non-acceptance and the motivation to accept the COVID-19 vaccine could guide the development of health education and promotion programmes, and aid governments and policymakers in implementing targeted policy changes.

3.
Ann Reg Sci ; : 1-28, 2022 Jan 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2235631

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the role of regional poverty on the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. It also explores how the effects differ with the concentration of ethnic minorities. We find that poverty is a significant and consistent determinant of higher COVID-19 infections and fatalities. Prevalent poverty areas experienced higher infections due to economic structure that require hypermobility (high mobility and interpersonal interaction)-more physical human to human contact resulting in higher deaths from limited access to health services. These are also regions where minority groups are concentrated. Disproportionate infections and fatalities occurred within the black, Hispanic, and Asian population. Our evidence is robust to state fixed effects that capture local COVID-19 mitigation policies, multi-level hierarchical modeling, spatial autoregressive assessment, and large sets of county-level health, social, and economic factors. This paper contributes to the literature on health and economic disparities and their resulting consequences for infectious diseases.

4.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 191, 2023 01 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2224158

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out across all the sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries, with countries setting targets for achieving full vaccination rates. The aim of this study was to compare the uptake of, resistance and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine between SSA locally residents and in the diasporan dwellers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted using a web and paper-based questionnaire to obtain relevant information on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The survey items included questions on demography, uptake and planned acceptance or non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines among SSAs. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine probabilities of outcomes for factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination resistance and hesitancy among SSA respondents residing within and outside Africa. RESULTS: Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines varied among the local (14.2%) and diasporan (25.3%) dwellers. There were more locals (68.1%) who were resistant to COVID-19 vaccine. Participants' sex [adjusted relative risk (ARR) = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58 - 0.93], education [primary/less: ARR = 0.22, CI:0.12 - 0.40, and bachelor's degree: ARR = 0.58, CI: 0.43 - 0.77]), occupation [ARR = 0.32, CI: 0.25-0.40] and working status [ARR = 1.40, CI: 1.06-1.84] were associated with COVID-19 vaccine resistance among locals. Similar proportion of local and diasporan dwellers (~ 18% each) were hesitant to COVID-19 vaccine, and this was higher among health care workers [ARR = 0.25, CI: 0.10 - 0.62 and ARR = 0.24, CI:0.18-0.32, diaspora and locals respectively]. After adjusting for the potential confounders, local residents aged 29-38 years [ARR = 1.89, CI: 1.26-2.84] and lived in East Africa [ARR = 4.64, CI: 1.84-11.70] were more likely to report vaccine hesitancy. Knowledge of COVID vaccines was associated with hesitancy among local and diasporan dwellers, but perception was associated with vaccine resistance [ARR = 0.86,CI: 0.82 - 0.90] and hesitancy [ARR = 0.85, CI: 0.80 - 0.90], only among the local residents. CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist in the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance between local SSA residents and thediasporan dwellers. Knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines affects the uptake, resistance, and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine. Information campaigns focusing on the efficacy and safety of vaccines could lead to improved acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , African People , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Probability , Vaccination
5.
Public Health Pract (Oxf) ; 5: 100361, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2182578

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the experiences and perceptions of postnatal mothers with quality of healthcare including WASH amenities among postnatal mothers in Ghana during the COVID-19 outbreak. Study design: The study was an institutional cross-sectional. Methods: The survey was conducted in six (6) regions across the northern, middle, and coastal belts of Ghana among postnatal mothers (n = 424). Eligible respondents accessed antenatal care (ANC) in 12 healthcare facilities (primary level and secondary level) during the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic. Univariate ordered logistic regression analysis was conducted to predict determinants of overall perceived quality of healthcare and experiences with WASH amenities in healthcare facilities visited. Findings: Privacy and confidentiality (mean score = 3.07) were the most highly rated quality indicator while the least rated indicator was dignity and respect of clients (mean score = 2.13). Approximately 50% of postnatal mothers reported paying out-of-pocket for essential ANC medications. Perceived quality of healthcare was positive among those who accessed care at a district/municipal hospital (Coef. = 1.29; 95%CI 0.45, 2.13, p = 0.003); co-habiting with a partner (Coef. = 1.64; 95%CI 0.64, 2.65, p = 0.001), and resident in an urban location (Coef. = 2.30; 95%CI 0.30, 3.30, p = 0.001). Mothers who accessed care at a district or municipal hospital (Coef. = 1.81; 95%CI 0.83, 2.78, p = 0.001); were co-habiting with a partner (Coef. = 1.92; 95%CI 0.76, 3.07, p = 0.001), and had a private health insurance cover (Coef. = 3.18; 95%CI 0.69, 5.67, p = 0.012) were more likely to rank WASH amenities better than their comparators. Conclusion: Overall perception of postnatal mothers of healthcare quality including WASH amenities after outbreak of COVID-19 was good, but with significant concerns about dignity and respect accorded them during care and having to pay out-of-pocket for some ANC medications. Relevant managers, service providers and regulatory institutions are encouraged to initiate and sustain policy dialogues and stakeholder consultations on the healthcare quality care gaps established in this study. There is the need for more investments in WASH amenities in the health sector as a quality assurance strategy, especially for maternal and child health services.

6.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 38, 2023 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196193

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vaccination remains the most powerful weapon against the emergence of new variants of coronavirus (COVID-19). However, false information about COVID-19 vaccines through various platforms including social media remains a major threat to global public health. This study examined the impact of information sources on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). METHODS: A validated web-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 14 March to 16 May 2021, and was administered in both French and English to 2572 participants aged 18 years and over. Data on sociodemographic characteristics, medical and vaccination history, and the information sources (mainstream media and social media) used by the participants during the pandemic were obtained. There were three main outcomes: The vaccinated group were those who responded in the affirmation (Yes) to the question of whether they have been vaccinated against COVID-19. Those who responded 'not sure' or 'no' to the question were then asked if they were willing to be vaccinated when the vaccine became available in their home countries. The responses to this follow-up question were used to derive the second and third outcome variables of 'vaccine hesitancy' and 'vaccine resistance', respectively. A series of logistic regression analyses were used to examine the impact of information sources on the three main outcomes. RESULTS: The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the participants was lowest among newspaper readers (42%) and highest among TV (72%) and social media users (73%). The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine-resistance was also lowest among newspaper readers (37%) but highest among social media users (87%). Multivariate analyses revealed that compared to those who did not use these information sources, SSA participants who relied on the radio (aOR 0.83, 95%CI = 0.70, 0.99), TV (aOR 0.80, 95%CI = 0.65, 0.97) and social media (aOR 0.79, 95%CI = 0.65, 0.97) for information during the pandemic were less likely to be hesitant towards taking the vaccines. However, social media users (aOR 2.13, 95%CI = 1.62, 2.80), those who watched TV (aOR 1.40, 95%CI =1.08, 1.80), relied on healthcare workers (HCWs: aOR 1.32, 95%CI = 1.07, 1.63) and families/friends (aOR 1.31, 95%CI = 1.06, 1.61) for COVID-19 related information during the pandemic were more likely to resist taking the COVID vaccines in this study. Participants who relied on the newspaper for information during the pandemic were less likely to resist the vaccines (aOR 0.77, 95%CI = 0.62, 0.95) compared to non-readers of a newspaper. CONCLUSION: We found that all six information sources except radio were strong predictors of the resistance towards COVID-19 vaccination. Further research on how these channels can be used to improve the availability of reliable healthcare information is needed. Investments in these resources will protect people and empower them to make appropriate choices about their health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Information Sources , Vaccination
7.
Journal of Community Health Research ; 11(3):191-201, 2022.
Article in English | CAB Abstracts | ID: covidwho-2155949

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The rollout of COVID-19 vaccine in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by infodemic. This study ascertained the influence of infodemic on individuals' willingness to be vaccinated for increased vaccine coverage in Delta State.

8.
Health Promot Perspect ; 12(2): 200-211, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2057089

ABSTRACT

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has caused a universal health crisis resulting in significant morbidities and mortalities particularly among high-risk groups. This study sought to determine regional factors associated with knowledge and attitude towards COVID-19 mitigation practices and risk perception of contracting the disease in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. Methods: A cross-sectional anonymous online study was conducted among 1970 participants between April and May 2020, during the lockdown in many SSA countries. Recruitment of participants was via WhatsApp, Facebook and emails using authors' networks. The outcome variables were KAP (knowledge, attitudes and practice) of COVID-19 and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc test was run to assess the level of KAP by four regions in SSA. Simple and multiple linear regression (MLR) analyses were performed to examine factors associated with the outcome measures in the four SSA regions. Results: Mean knowledge (P=0.707) and risk perception (P=0.904) scores by four regions in SSA did not differ significantly. However, the mean attitude score was higher among West Africans compared with Southern (P=0.019) and Central Africans (P=0.003). MLR analysis revealed that among those living in West (adjusted coefficient ß=-0.83 95% CI: -1.19, -0.48) and Southern Africa (ß=-0.91 95% CI: -1.42, -0.40), having a primary or secondary education was associated with a decrease in knowledge scores while not being worried about COVID-19 decreased risk perception scores across the four SSA regions(West [ß=-6.57, 95% CI: -7.53, -5.62], East [ß=-6.24: 95% CI: -8.34,-4.15], Central [ß=-6.51, 95% CI: -8.70, -4.31], and Southern Africa [ß=-6.06: 95% CI: -7.51, -4.60]). Except among Southern Africans, participants who practiced self-isolation had positive attitude towards COVID-19. Conclusion: Future research on health education regarding COVID-19 or a future related pandemic in SSA should target people with lower education, those who do not self-isolate, those living in Southern and Western Africa and not worried about contracting COVID-19.

9.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods ; : 1-9, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2021042

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses multidisciplinary international research collaboration team formation during the COVID-19 pandemic, challenges faced, strategies adopted, achievements and dynamics in the implementation of research on Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), by the African Translational Research Group (ATReG). The paper also discusses the lessons learnt and future opportunities for global collaborative research. In-depth virtual interviews were conducted with consenting members of ATReG. Questions were designed to provide rich, deep, and insightful opinions, lived experiences and perspectives of ATReG group members on group formation, challenges, strategies and achievements. Interview data was transcribed and analysed thematically, and the results were presented with important quotations presented. The ATReG consisted of English (n = 13) and French (n = 1) speaking sub-Saharan African (SSA) researchers who specialise in public health, epidemiology, optometry, information technology, supply chain management, psychiatry, community health, general medical practice, nutrition and biostatistics. Most members of the group reported an informal but well-coordinated structure of the group. Formed during the pandemic, all group meetings were held online, and many members are yet to meet each other in person. The group collected data from Africans and published 10 peer reviewed journal articles on COVID-19 within two years. It presented in international conferences, engaged with the media and the public and was awarded a national competitive funding in Nigeria all of which which contributed to career progression and academic promotion of some members. There have been challenges in sustaining the research collaboration and maintaining productivity. Challenges include difficulties meeting deadlines and obtaining funding for research activities. However, these challenges have been addressed through a collaborative problem-solving approach. The study found the need for operational and methodological flexibility, centralised coordination, and established funding sources as being essential for long term sustainability and performance of the group. The ATReG's objective of providing useful data on COVID-19 and generating useful knowledge about COVID-19 in SSA has been achieved. In such a multi-disciplinary international collaborative team relaiant on the online medium to operate, the experiences and challenges can be a model for learning for researchers intending to form international multidisciplinary collaborative groups. Nonetheless, there are still many important areas of research which ATReG will continue to pursue. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Qualitative Methods is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

10.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(13)2022 06 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1911378

ABSTRACT

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with severe COVID-19 infection and complications. This study assesses COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in people with DM, and explores the reasons for not being vaccinated. This was a web-based cross-sectional survey using a mixed-method approach conducted in March-May 2021, corresponding to most Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries' early vaccine rollout period. Participants were those aged ≥18 years with self-reported DM in 11 Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. Responses to comments on the reasons for vaccine hesitancy and facilitators for vaccine uptake were analyzed. Of the 73 participants with DM, 65.8% were males, older than 35 years (86.3%), had postsecondary education (90%), and a significant proportion were from South Africa (39.7%), Nigeria (28.8%) and Ghana (13.7%). At the time of this study, 64.4% experienced COVID-19 symptoms, 46.6% were tested for COVID-19, of which 19.2% tested positive. Few participants (6.8%) had received a COVID-19 vaccination, 65.8% were willing to take the vaccine when it becomes available in their country, while 26.0% either refused or remained hesitant towards taking the vaccine. The main identified reasons for not taking the vaccine were: advice from religious leaders; concerns about the safety, effects, and efficacy of the vaccines; mistrust of the pharmaceutical companies producing the vaccines and the process of production; the conspiracy theories around the vaccines; and the personal belief of the participants regarding vaccination. However, participants stated they would take the vaccine if they were more educated about it, received positive feedback from those vaccinated, were rewarded for taking the vaccine, or if vaccination became a condition for travel and employment. In conclusion, this study shows that the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine was very low in this high-risk group. Efforts to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among people with diabetes are imperative, such as the provision of education and relevant information.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Vaccines , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Female , Ghana , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Male , Motivation , Nigeria/epidemiology , Perception , Vaccination
11.
PeerJ ; 10: e13334, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879633

ABSTRACT

Background: The increase in online learning during the pandemic has been linked to various ocular complaints. This study determined the prevalence and factors associated with ocular complaints among schoolchildren aged 12-19 years during the COVID-19 lockdown in Trinidad and Tobago (T&T). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between January and May 2021, during the COVID-19 lockdown in T&T among secondary school students studying remotely. A two-stage cluster sampling method was employed. A modified web-based Computer Vision Syndrome questionnaire was administered to students. Data on demography, duration of digital device use, and ocular complaints were collected, and multilevel logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with ocular complaints among school children, 12-19 years of age in T&T. Results: A total of 435 schoolchildren (mean age, standard deviation, 15.2 ± 1.9 years range 12-19 years) responded to the questionnaire. The prevalence of self-reported symptoms of headache, blurred vision, dry eyes, itchy eyes, and double vision were 75.0%, 65.1%; 56.8%; 46.4%; and 33.5%, respectively. Schoolchildren aged 18-19 years, those that used spectacles for correction of their refractive errors, and spent more than 6 h on average on digital devices, reported a high prevalence of any ocular complaints. Analysis also revealed that age (14-15 years) was associated with dry eyes, blurred vision, and headaches, while gender (more prevalently females) was associated with blurred vision and headache. Those that had an eye examination in the last year and schoolchildren that took action to resolve ocular complaints were more likely to experience nearly all ocular complaints. Conclusions: During the COVID-19 lockdown, over three in four students in T&T reported ocular complaints from digital devices for online learning. Tailored interventional messages to reduce all forms of ocular complaints should target older students, particularly females, those who laid down when learning online via their devices and people who regularly examine their eyes.

12.
preprints.org; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-PREPRINTS.ORG | ID: ppzbmed-10.20944.preprints202205.0099.v2

ABSTRACT

Abstract: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with severe COVID-19 infection and complications. This study assessed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in diabetes and explored reasons for nonvaccinating. This was a web-based cross-sectional survey using a mixed-method approach conducted between March-May 2021 corresponding to most SSA countries' early vaccine rollout period. Participants were those aged ≥18 years with self-reported DM in 11 Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. Responses to comments on reasons for vaccine hesitancy and facilitators for vaccine uptake were analyzed. Of the 73 participants with DM, 65.8% were males older than 35 years (86.3%), had post-secondary education (90%), and a significant proportion was from South Africa (39.7%), Nigeria (28.8%) and Ghana (13.7%). 64.4% had COVID-19 symptoms, 46.6% were tested for COVID-19, of which 19.2% tested positive. Few participants (6.8%) had taken the COVID-19 vaccination, 65.8% were willing to take the vaccine, while 26.0% either refused or hesitated to take the vaccine. The main reasons identified for not taking the vaccine were: advice from religious leaders, concerns about the vaccine safety, its effects, and efficacy, mistrust of the pharmaceutical companies, the conspiracy theories around the vaccines, the process of production, and the personal belief of the participants. However, participants stated they would take the vaccine if given more education about it, receive positive feedback from those vaccinated, are rewarded for taking the vaccine or if vaccination becomes a condition for travel and employment. The findings of this study showed that uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine was very low in this high-risk group. It is imperative that efforts to increase the uptake of vaccines, such as the provision of education and relevant information, are made.

13.
Risk Manag Healthc Policy ; 14: 4799-4807, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1834054

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The key preventive measures adopted to minimise the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) had significant health, economic and physical impacts mostly in developing countries. This study evaluated the health, economic and physical impacts of COVID-19 lockdown measures among sub-Saharan African (SSA) population and associated demographic variations. METHODS: A total of 1970 respondents took part in this web-based cross-sectional survey during the mandatory lockdown period in most SSA. The dependent variables were health (COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation), socioeconomic (lost job, closed down business) and physical impacts (separated from family) of COVID-19. Univariate and bivariate logistic regression analyses were used to explore the factors associated with each of the dependent variables by the four sub-regions (Southern, Western, Central and East Africa). RESULTS: The respondents were aged 34.1 ± 11.5 years (range: 18-75 years) and mostly men (1099, 55%). 25.9% (n = 511) reported an impact of COVID-19 pandemic with significant regional variations (p < 0.0005, higher proportion were East 36.2% and Southern Africans 30.3%) but no gender (p = 0.334) and age group variations (p > 0.05). Among Central African respondents, more men than women lost their businesses (45.7% versus 14.3%, p = 0.002) and contracted COVID-19 infections (40.0% versus 18.2%, p = 0.024) during the study period. Multivariable analysis revealed that respondents from East (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-2.69), Southern (AOR 1.46, 95% CI: 1.09-1.96) and Central Africa (AOR 1.47, 95% CI: 1.06-2.03) reported significantly higher impact of COVID-19. Those who reported family separation during the lockdown were more likely to be older participants (39-48 years, AOR 2.48, 95% CI: 1.11-5.57). CONCLUSION: One in four SSA respondents, mostly East and Southern Africans, were adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic during the lockdown. Interventions in high-risk populations are needed to reduce the health, socioeconomic and gender disparities in the impacts of COVID-19.

14.
2021 International Conference on Computational Performance Evaluation, ComPE 2021 ; : 103-106, 2021.
Article in English | Scopus | ID: covidwho-1831751

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome. The disease was first instigated in December 2019 in the place called Wuhan which is the capital of a province in China named Hubei and meanwhile, it has spread universally throughout the world. The impact is greatly influenced so that World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency. Artificial intelligence renders its support to analyze chest X-ray (CXR) images for COVID-19 diagnosis. This proposed system is aimed to automatically detect COVID-19 patients using digital chest x- ray images while increasing the accuracy of the model tried with different convolution layers. The dataset was created as a mixture of publicly available X-ray images from patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease and healthy folks. To alleviate the small number of samples, we have inculcated many data augmentation techniques that further enhance the accuracy of the model with different convolution layers. The research aims to design a Deep Learning based model for Covid 19 prediction through X-Ray images. The parameters chosen are applied over 3 different models designed by varying Convolution Layers and proved that accuracy enhances when number of layers increases. © 2021 IEEE.

15.
researchsquare; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-1525533.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out across all the Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries, with countries setting targets for achieving full vaccination rates. The aim of this study was to compare the uptake of, resistance and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine between SSA locally residents and in the diaspora. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted using a web and paper-based questionnaire to obtain relevant information on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The survey items included questions on demography, uptake and planned acceptance or non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines among SSAs. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine probabilities of outcomes for factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination resistance and hesitancy among SSA respondents residing within and outside Africa. Results: Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines varied among the local (14.2%) and diaspora (25.3%) residents. There was more resistance to COVID-19 vaccine among locals (68.1%) and across the sociodemographic variables of sex [adjusted Relative Risk (ARR) =0.73, 95% CI; 0.58 – 0.93], primary/less [ARR =0.22, 95% CI; 0.12 – 0.40] and bachelor’s degree [ARR =0.58, 95% CI; 0.43 – 0.77] educational levels, occupation [ARR =0.32, 95% CI; 0.25 - 0.40] and working status [ARR =1.40, 95%CI; 1.06 - 1.84]. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was almost similar between locals and diasporas (17.7% and 17.8% respectively) significant only among healthcare workers [ARR =0.46, 95% CI; 0.16 – 1.35] in the diaspora after adjusting for the variables. Similarly, knowledge and perception of COVID-19 vaccine among locals were substantial, but only perception was remarkable to resistance [ARR =0.86, 95% CI; 0.82 – 0.90] and hesitancy [ARR =0.85, 95% CI; 0.80 – 0.90] of the vaccine. Conclusions: Differences exist in the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance between local SSA residents and those in the diaspora. Knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines affects the uptake, resistance, and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine. Information campaigns focusing on the efficacy and safety of vaccines could lead to improved acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.

16.
Leukemia and Lymphoma ; 62(SUPPL 1):S117-S118, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1747039

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) therapy is remarkably effective in a number of B-cell malignancies;however, its continuous use is limited by adverse events (AE) leading to discontinuation. Zanubrutinib is a potent and selective BTKi with the potential to be a safe and effective therapy after intolerance to previous BTKi therapy. Here, we report preliminary results of a phase 2 study of zanubrutinib in patients with B-cell malignancies intolerant to ibrutinib and/or acalabrutinib based on a median follow-up of 6 months. Methods: Patients meeting protocol criteria for intolerance to ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or both (without documented progressive disease on ibrutinib or acalabrutinib) were given zanubrutinib monotherapy (160mg twice daily or 320mg once daily at investigator's discretion). Recurrence of adverse events that led to intolerance to prior BTKi and additional safety measures were assessed based on the Common Terminology Criteria for AEs v5.0. Investigators determined responses using disease status at study entry as baseline and standard established disease response criteria. Results: As of 1 March 2021 (cutoff), 64 patients (n=48 chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma, n=10 Waldenström macroglobulinemia, n=3 mantle cell lymphoma, n=3 marginal zone lymphoma) were enrolled, received ≥1 dose of zanubrutinib, and were analyzed for safety. The median age was 71 y (range, 49-91);the median duration of treatment was 5.9 months (range, 0.6-16.6). The median number of prior regimens was 2 (range, 1-12). Regarding prior BTKi, 55 patients had received ibrutinib monotherapy, eight had received ibrutinib combination therapy, and seven had received acalabrutinib monotherapy. The median number of ibrutinib- or acalabrutinib-intolerant adverse events per patient was 2 (range, 1-5). Most ibrutinib- (75%) and acalabrutinib-intolerant events (75%) did not recur with zanubrutinib (Table 1). A majority (90%) of the recurrent ibrutinib-intolerant events were less severe with zanubrutinib than with ibrutinib. Ibrutinib intolerance events present in >1 patient that did not recur on zanubrutinib were alanine aminotransferase increased, aspartate transaminase increased, neutropenia, and pain in extremity. The ibrutinib-intolerant events that recurred were diarrhea, dizziness, insomnia, nausea, constipation, myalgia, stomatitis, arthralgia, headache, muscle spasm, rash, atrial fibrillation, fatigue, hemorrhage, and hypertension. One-third of the recurrent acalabrutinibintolerant events were less severe with zanubrutinib than with acalabrutinib. The acalabrutinib-intolerant events that recurred were myalgia and arthralgia. Two events of arthralgia that induced acalabrutinib intolerance did not recur with zanubrutinib. No ibrutinib- or acalabrutinib-intolerant events recurred at a higher severity while patients were on zanubrutinib. At cutoff, 57 patients remained on treatment;one withdrew consent due to zanubrutinib-unrelated grade 3 syncope. Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 14 patients (21.9%), serious adverse events in five patients (7.8%;pain in jaw;COVID-19 pneumonia;anemia;febrile neutropenia and salmonella infection [occurred in the same patient]), adverse events requiring dose interruptions in 15 patients (23.4%), and adverse events leading to dose reduction in three patients (4.7%). Adverse events led to zanubrutinib discontinuation for three patients (4.7%). One death was reported (COVID-19 pneumonia). Among efficacy evaluable patients (n=48), the disease control rate was 89.6% and the overall response rate was 50.0%. Conclusions: In patients with B-cell malignancies intolerant to ibrutinib and/or acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib therapy was effective and controlled patient's disease or induced responses to therapy, and was well-tolerated;most adverse events that led to discontinuation of previous BTKi therapy did not recur while patients were on zanubrutinib.

17.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.03.16.22272510

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out across all the Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries, with countries setting targets for achieving full vaccination rates. The aim of this study was to compare the uptake of, resistance and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine between SSA locally residents and in the diaspora. This was a cross-sectional study conducted using a web and paper-based questionnaire to obtain relevant information on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The survey items included questions on demography, uptake and planned acceptance or non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines among SSAs. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine probabilities of outcomes for factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination resistance and hesitancy among SSA respondents residing within and outside Africa. Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines varied among the local (14.2%) and diaspora (25.3%) residents. There was more resistance to COVID-19 vaccine among locals (68.1%) and across the sociodemographic variables of sex [ adjusted Relative Risk (ARR) =0.73, 95% CI; 0.58 - 0.93], primary/less [ARR =0.22, 95% CI; 0.12 - 0.40] and bachelors degree [ARR =0.58, 95% CI; 0.43 - 0.77] educational levels, occupation [ARR =0.32, 95% CI; 0.25 - 0.40] and working status [ARR =1.40, 95%CI; 1.06 - 1.84]. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was almost similar between locals and diasporas (17.7% and 17.8% respectively) significant only among healthcare workers [ARR =0.46, 95% CI; 0.16 - 1.35] in the diaspora after adjusting for the variables. Similarly, knowledge and perception of COVID-19 vaccine among locals were substantial, but only perception was remarkable to resistance [ARR =0.86, 95% CI; 0.82 - 0.90] and hesitancy [ARR =0.85, 95% CI; 0.80 - 0.90] of the vaccine. Differences exist in the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance between local SSA residents and those in the diaspora. Knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines affects the uptake, resistance, and hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine. Information campaigns focusing on the efficacy and safety of vaccines could lead to improved acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.

18.
researchsquare; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-1385351.v1

ABSTRACT

Background Vaccination remains the most powerful weapon against the emergence of new variants of coronavirus (COVID-19). However, false information about COVID-19 vaccines through various platforms including social media remain a major threat to global public health. The study examined the impact of information sources on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).Methods A validated web-based questionnaire was administered in French and English to 2572 participants from sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries including Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, who were aged 18 years and over. An e-link to the survey was disseminated via emails and posted on social media platforms (Facebook and WhatsApp). The COVID-19 vaccination status (vaccinated, hesitancy and resistance) and their association with sources of information (mainstream media and social media) were assessed by conducting multinomial logistic regression analyses.Results The prevalence of vaccine resistance and hesitancy in SSA was higher among social media users (72.2 and 84.5%) and those that watched TV (73.0 and 79.7%), but lower among newspaper readers (42.5 and 36.7%) respectively, during the pandemic. Multivariate analysis revealed that Southern and Central African respondents were more likely rely on TV for information, women and those who smoke were more likely to rely on friends and family members for information during the pandemic. Lower education (primary education or less) was associated with lower likelihood of social media use for COVID-19 related information compared with postgraduate qualification (aOR 0.36, 95%CI 0.20, 0.62). Resistance to COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reliance families and friends (aOR 1.44, 95%CI = 1.08, 1.93), watching TV (aOR 1.54, 95%CI = 1.11, 2.14) and social media use (adjusted odds ratio aOR 2.93, 95%CI = 2.10, 4.09), which was also associated with vaccine hesitancy (aOR 1.46, 95%CI = 1.15, 1.85) among the respondents.Conclusions Our study showed that reliance on social media and television had the strongest impact on vaccine hesitancy. However, further research and investments are needed to improve the availability of reliable healthcare information in these channels to protect people and empower them to make appropriate choices about their health.

19.
Blood ; 138:1410, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1582348

ABSTRACT

Background: Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) are important tools to treat B-cell malignancies. However, duration of treatment may be limited by adverse events (AEs). Zanubrutinib (zanu) is a BTKi approved for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and is in development for other hematologic malignancies. Data from phase 3 head-to-head trials of zanu vs ibrutinib (ibr) in pts with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) demonstrated that pts treated with zanu showed lower rates of AEs leading to discontinuation (Blood 2020;136(18):2038-50;EHA 2021 LB1900). Preliminary results from BGB-3111-215 (NCT04116437) show that zanu was well-tolerated in pts who discontinued ibr and/or acalabrutinib (acala) treatment due to AEs (EHA 2021 EP642). Here, we report updated results from the BGB-3111-215 study with a median follow-up of 9 months. Methods: This study is an ongoing US, phase 2, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study. The safety and efficacy of zanu monotherapy (160 mg twice daily or 320 mg once daily) were evaluated in pts with B-cell malignancies who met criteria for continued treatment after having become intolerant to prior BTKi therapy. Pts were divided into cohort 1 (pts who were intolerant to ibr only) and cohort 2 (pts who were intolerant to acala alone/and ibr). Pts with documented progressive disease (PD) on prior BTKi therapy were excluded. Efficacy and safety, including recurrence of intolerant AEs to the prior BTKi, were evaluated. AEs were assessed for severity, seriousness, and relation to zanu;as well as dose reductions, holds, or discontinuations. Response was assessed by investigators based on response criteria for their respective indications (Blood 2008;131:2745;J Clin Oncol 2012;30:2820;J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3059;Br J Haemtol 2013;160:171). Disease parameters from study entry were the baseline for response assessment. Mutational analysis was performed on pts who discontinued treatment, and data will be shared once available. To support clinical findings, kinase selectivity was assessed using Kinome profiling at 100X IC50 (against BTK) for zanu, ibr, acala and its major metabolite, M27 (Reaction Biology Corp). Results: As of 7 June 2021 (data cutoff), 57 pts (n=44 CLL/SLL;n=9 WM;n=2 MCL;n=2 marginal zone lymphoma [MZL]) were enrolled in cohort 1, and 7 pts were enrolled in cohort 2 (n=4 CLL;n=1 WM;n=1 MCL;n=1 MZL). All received ≥1 dose of zanu and were analyzed for safety. The median age was 71 years (range, 49-91) in cohort 1 and 71 years (range, 65-76) in cohort 2;median duration of treatment was 8.7 months (range, 0.6-17.9) in cohort 1 and 8.2 months (range, 6.4-11.4) in cohort 2;median number of prior regimens was 1 (range, 1-12) in cohort 1 and 3 (range, 2-5) in cohort 2. Within cohort 2, 5 pts were intolerant to both ibr and acala. Median number of intolerant events per pt for both cohorts 1 and 2 was 2 (range, 1-5). Overall, 73% of pts did not experience recurrence of their ibr or acala intolerant events and 79% of recurrent events recurred at a lower severity (Figure 1). At cutoff, 54 pts remained on treatment. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were AEs (n=4), PD (n=4), physician's decision (n=1), and consent withdrawal (n=1). Grade ≥3 AEs were reported in 18 pts (28%), and serious AEs occurred in 7 pts (11%). AEs requiring dose interruptions occurred in 17 pts (27%), and AEs leading to dose reduction occurred in 3 pts (5%). One death, due to COVID-19, was reported. Pts demonstrated maintained (41%) and improved (53%) response with zanu treatment from their reported best overall response on prior BTKis for a total disease control rate of 94% (including a 42% partial response rate in pts with CLL/SLL, 30% in pts with WM, and a 20% very good partial response rate in pts with WM). Zanu also demonstrated good selectivity by kinase profiling. It showed >50% inhibition on 7/370 kinases, while ibr, acala, and M27 had more off-target binding (17, 15 and 23 kinases, respectively) at their respective 100X IC50 (BTK) c ncentrations (Figure 2). Conclusion: In pts with B-cell malignancies intolerant to ibr and/or acala, zanu treatment resulted in continued disease control or improved response. Zanu was well-tolerated, and most AEs that led to discontinuation of previous BTKi therapy did not recur or recurred at a lower grade. In support of clinical findings, differentiation between BTKi selectivity profiles favor zanu over ibr and acala. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Shadman: Abbvie, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Sound Biologics, Pharmacyclics, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Morphosys, TG Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Kite Pharma, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Epizyme, Eli Lilly, and Atara Biotherapeutics, Adaptimmune: Consultancy;Mustang Bio, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pharmacyclics, Gilead, Genentech, Abbvie, TG Therapeutics, Beigene, AstraZeneca, Sunesis, Atara Biotherapeutics, GenMab: Research Funding;Abbvie, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Sound Biologics, Pharmacyclics, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Morphosys, TG Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Kite Pharma, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Epizyme, Eli Lilly, and Atara Biotherapeutics, Adaptimmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Flinn: Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;MorphoSys: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Forty Seven: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Calithera Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Verastem: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Curis: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Takeda: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;IGM Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: All Consultancy and Research Funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Portola Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Trillium Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Incyte: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Acerta Pharma: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Agios: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Karyopharm Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Forma Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Genentech: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;ArQule: Other: All research funding payments mad to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Roche: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Pfizer: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Teva: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Celgene: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Loxo: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Merck: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Novartis: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Great Point Partners: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made toSarah Cannon Research Institute;BeiGene: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Janssen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Century Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Hutchison MediPharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Vincerx Pharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Sarah Cannon Research Institute: Current Employment;Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute;Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding;Johnson & Johnson: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company;Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Levy: Epizyme: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker;Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau;GSK: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker;Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau;Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau;Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker;Dova: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker;TG Therapeutics: Co sultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau;Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau;Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau;Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau. Burke: SeaGen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;MorphoSys: Consultancy;Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy;AstraZeneca: Consultancy;Epizyme: Consultancy;Verastem: Consultancy;Kura: Consultancy;Kymera: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy;Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy;Roche/Genentech: Consultancy;X4 Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Cultrera: Beigene: Research Funding. Yimer: Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau;Karyopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Speakers Bureau;Beigene: Speakers Bureau;GSK: Speakers Bureau;Sanofi: Speakers Bureau;Amgen: Speakers Bureau;Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau;Texas Oncology: Current Employment. Chaudhry: Medical Oncology Associates, PS (dba Summit Cancer Centers): Current Employment;Novartis, Immunomedics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Gandhi: TG Therapeutics: Honoraria;Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria;GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria. Kingsley: Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada: Current Employment. Tumula: Texas Oncology: Current Employment. Manda: Morphosys: Honoraria;Genmab: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chen: BeiGene: Current Employment, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Cohen: BeiGene: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. By: BeiGene, Ltd: Current Employment. Xu: Beigene: Current Employment;AstraZeneca: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Liu: BeiGene Co., Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sharman: TG Therapeutics: Consultancy;Centessa: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy;BMS: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy;BeiGene: Consultancy;AstraZeneca: Consultancy;Lilly: Consultancy.

20.
Economic Modelling ; : 105625, 2021.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1363997

ABSTRACT

How are the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) markets managing global policy uncertainties? Which policy drives regional fluctuations? Although less literature is available on emerging economies, this study fills the gap by investigating the spillover effects of economic and trade policy uncertainty from the US and China on regional systemic risk in ASEAN markets. Using monthly stock returns from ASEAN-5, within a time-varying parameter vector autoregressive approach, this study shows that although policy uncertainty shocks from the US are significant, their effect on ASEAN markets started to wane from late 2013, with China’s policy uncertainty overtaking the US as the leading systemic risk contributor. In particular, China’s trade policy uncertainty demonstrates the most influential contagion effect on ASEAN markets. The results accentuate the strength of bilateral and trade relations via supply-side shock channels as a key determinant of emerging markets’ exposure to policy uncertainty headwinds from global hegemonies.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL