Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 7.880
Filter
1.
Pharmaceutical Technology Europe ; 34(8):22-26, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20245726

ABSTRACT

Increasing production capacity may necessitate the facility to cater for higher hazardous area category (e.g., H-Occupancy) design features, such as specialized building construction and potential blast zones. [...]an assessment should cover: * Quantification of flammable material use for production steps, including buffer preparation and LNP storage * Equipment and facility cleaning strategies that contribute to the facility flammable materials inventory * Impact of HVAC design to avoid hazardous atmospheres (e.g., full fresh air), use of local exhaust ventilation (LEV) or fume hoods * Solvent distribution methods (e.g., closed solvent delivery and waste removal systems) * Location of solvent bulk storage outside of the processing area/ facility, and piping in what is necessary plus removing spent solvent in a timely manner (e.g., piped transfer to a waste tank for removal by a specialist contractor). At present, the process cannot be fully single-use, so thought needs to be put into the cleaning and sterilization processes, plus the analytical support infrastructure needed for reusable product-contact surfaces. [...]it is recommended that for each mRNA project, consideration is given to the following aspects to determine the link between the equipment available and the facility design: * Need for custom/proprietary equipment * Independent production rooms with "through-wall" buffer transfer through iris ports in from logistics corridor (Buffer Prep/Hold) * Room electrical classification needs versus process step. * Equipment selection versus electrical and fire code requirements * Benefits and limitations of implementing single-use technologies, given that the process will be hybrid (with stainless steel). [...]the limited capacity for outsourcing of supporting functions, such as facility environmental monitoring or product sterility testing, should be considered during concept design.

2.
Front Microbiol ; 14: 1215690, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20245672
5.
Med. lab ; 26(3): 219-236, 2022. Tabs, ilus, Grafs
Article in Spanish | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-20244331

ABSTRACT

El virus SARS-CoV-2 continúa infectando a millones de individuos en el mundo. Aunque los síntomas más frecuentes observados en los pacientes con COVID-19 son fiebre, fatiga y tos, en los casos severos la hipercoagulabilidad y la inflamación son dos condiciones que pueden producir complicaciones y causar daño en órganos, poniendo en riesgo la vida del paciente. Con el fin de clasificar a los pacientes durante el triaje, se han explorado diferentes marcadores hematológicos, incluidos el recuento de plaquetas, linfocitos y eosinófilos, y la relación neutrófilos/ linfocitos, entre otros. Por su parte, para la evaluación de las coagulopatías, se vienen determinando marcadores como el dímero D y el fibrinógeno. En esta revisión se abordan las coagulopatías y los parámetros hematológicos en pacientes con COVID-19, al igual que las anormalidades en la coagulación como la trombocitopenia trombótica inmune inducida por las vacunas contra el SARS-CoV-2


The SARS-CoV-2 virus continues to infect millions of individuals around the world. Although the most frequent symptoms observed in patients with COVID-19 are fever, fatigue and cough, in severe cases hypercoagulability and inflammation are two conditions that can cause complications and organ failure, putting the patient's life at risk. In order to classify patients during triage, different hematological markers have been explored, including platelet, lymphocyte, and eosinophil counts, and the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, among others. Furthermore, for the evaluation of coagulopathies, markers such as D-dimer and fibrinogen are being evaluated. This review addresses the coagulopathies and hematological parameters in patients with COVID-19, as well as coagulation abnormalities such as immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines


Subject(s)
Humans , COVID-19 , Prognosis , Reference Standards , Thrombosis , Blood Coagulation , Blood Coagulation Disorders , Blood Platelets , Vaccines , Antigens, Differentiation , SARS-CoV-2 , Hematology
6.
Eur J Immunol ; 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20241530

ABSTRACT

Replication-incompetent adenovirus (Ad) vector and mRNA-lipid nanoparticle (LNP) constructs represent two modular vaccine platforms that have attracted substantial interest over the past two decades. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid development of multiple successful vaccines based on these technologies, there is now clear real-world evidence of the utility and efficacy of these platforms. Considerable optimization and refinement efforts underpin the successful application of these technologies. Despite this, our understanding of the specific pathways and processes engaged by these vaccines to stimulate the immune response remains incomplete. This review will synthesize our current knowledge of the specific mechanisms by which CD8+ T cell and antibody responses are induced by each of these vaccine platforms, and how this can be impacted by specific vaccine construction techniques. Key gaps in our knowledge are also highlighted, which can hopefully focus future studies.

7.
Mod Rheumatol Case Rep ; 2022 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239940

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccines have some adverse effects, mostly mild. However, by presenting an immunological challenge to the individual, they could infrequently trigger immune-mediated diseases. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 42-year-old woman, with no previous medical history, who received the first dose of vaccine against COVID-19 and developed inflammatory arthralgias, associated with sudden onset dyspnea and hypoxemia. Pulmonary thromboembolism was documented and the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and secondary antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) was suspected. Autoantibodies were measured confirming this suspicion. After a few days, she presented a massive pericardial effusion with cardiac tamponade that required surgical management. She received treatment with hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids and anticoagulation with improvement of all symptoms. DISCUSSION: There is controversy regarding the potential of COVID-19 vaccines to induce autoimmunity. Studies addressing the safety of using these vaccines have reported the occurrence of mild local and systemic reactions, most frequently in young adults. So far there are few reports of patients who have developed autoimmune or autoinflammatory diseases after getting vaccinated with any of the COVID-19 vaccines. To the best of our knowledge, to date this is one of the first cases of new-onset SLE and secondary APS after COVID-19 vaccination.

8.
Ann Nutr Metab ; : 1-9, 2022 Feb 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20239750

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The current pandemic and the concerns of vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 have contributed to increasing the rate of breastfeeding interruption. This tendency has been associated with negative effects on the well-being of lactating mothers and their infants. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence on the strategies to support breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic and on the safety of breastfeeding during a SARS-CoV-2 infection or after COVID-19 vaccination. SUMMARY: Available data show that the lack of support of lactating mothers during the pandemic has contributed to breastfeeding cessation worldwide. However, a few strategies have been proposed to overcome this issue. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from infected mothers to their offspring is extremely low. Furthermore, vaccination of lactating mothers is not associated with side effects in their infants. Key Messages: Increasing effort should be made to support breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mothers who are able to take care of their offspring and to adopt basic hygiene measures should not interrupt breastfeeding during a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination of lactating mothers might further strengthen the protective effect of breastfeeding against infections.

9.
Ophthalmology ; 2022 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20236610

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate the risk of ocular adverse events after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccination. DESIGN: Matched cohort and self-controlled case series (SCCS) studies. PARTICIPANTS: We used a population-based database of medical claims and vaccination records in a large Japanese city. In the matched cohort study, we identified individuals who received COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2) from February 2021 to September 2021. One control was selected from nonvaccinated individuals by matching time, date of birth, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and the enrollment period for health insurance. In the SCCS study, we analyzed individuals who developed ocular adverse events. METHODS: In the matched cohort study, we applied the Kaplan-Meier estimator to estimate the cumulative incidence of ocular adverse events over 21 days after the first dose and 84 days after the second dose. In the SCCS method, we used conditional Poisson regression to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of ocular adverse events during the risk periods (0-21 days after the first dose and 0-84 days after the second dose) compared with the remaining periods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Composite outcome of uveitis, scleritis, retinal vein occlusion (RVO), and optic neuritis. RESULTS: There were 99 718 pairs eligible for the matched cohort study after the first dose (mean age, 69.3 years; male, 44%). The vaccinated and control groups developed 29 and 21 events, respectively, over 21 days after the first dose, and 79 and 28 events, respectively, over 84 days after the second dose. The differences in cumulative incidence (reference, the control group) were 2.9 (95% confidence interval, -14.5 to 19.1) events/100 000 persons and 51.3 (16.2-84.3) events/100 000 persons, respectively, for the first and second doses. The SCCS study showed the IRRs of 0.89 (0.62-1.28) and 0.89 (0.71-1.11) for the first and second doses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The matched cohort analysis found an increased risk for the composite outcome after the second dose; however, the SCCS analysis showed no increased risk. Considering that the SCCS can cancel out time-invariant confounders, the current results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination is unlikely to causally increase the risk of ocular adverse events. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

10.
J Biomol Struct Dyn ; : 1-22, 2022 May 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235354

ABSTRACT

The genome feature of SARS-CoV-2 leads the virus to mutate and creates new variants of concern. Tackling viral mutations is also an important challenge for the development of a new vaccine. Accordingly, in the present study, we undertook to identify B- and T-cell epitopes with immunogenic potential for eliciting responses to SARS-CoV-2, using computational approaches and its tailoring to coronavirus variants. A total of 47 novel epitopes were identified as immunogenic triggering immune responses and no toxic after investigation with in silico tools. Furthermore, we found these peptide vaccine candidates showed a significant binding affinity for MHC I and MHC II alleles in molecular docking investigations. We consider them to be promising targets for developing peptide-based vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. Subsequently, we designed two efficient multi-epitopes vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2, the first one based on potent MHC class I and class II T-cell epitopes of S (FPNITNLCPF-NYNYLYRLFR-MFVFLVLLPLVSSQC), M (MWLSYFIASF-GLMWLSYFIASFRLF), E (LTALRLCAY-LLFLAFVVFLLVTLA), and N (SPRWYFYYL-AQFAPSASAFFGMSR). The second candidate is the result of the tailoring of the first designed vaccine according to three classes of SARS-CoV-2 variants. Molecular docking showed that the protein-protein binding interactions between the vaccines construct and TLR2-TLR4 immune receptors are stable complexes. These findings confirmed that the final multi-epitope vaccine could be easily adapted to new viral variants. Our study offers a shortlist of promising epitopes that can accelerate the development of an effective and safe vaccine against the virus and its adaptation to new variants.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

11.
Int J Audiol ; : 1-5, 2022 May 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235179

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To gain medical insight into the clinical course and safety of otolaryngologic disorders following immunisation with severe acute respiratory coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA-based vaccines. DESIGN: Case description. STUDY SAMPLE: We report four cases of transient audio-vestibular symptoms, which occurred shortly after inoculation of two BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech®) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna®) vaccines. RESULTS: Hearing loss was unilateral in all cases and recovered at least partially: it was associated with persistent gait instability in two cases, after 1 and 7 months. Trigger mechanisms underpinning audio-vestibular impairment remain uncertain. Immune tolerance mechanisms with off-target innate activation of T-lymphocytes may be involved in vestibulocochlear nerve disorders, as for other cranial nerves involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of audio-vestibular manifestations following mRNA-based vaccines needs ENT monitoring to support their causality in such rare vaccine-related adverse events. Audio-vestibular disorders appeared of transitory nature, including hearing loss, and should not deter further efforts in large-scale vaccination campaigns against SARS-CoV-2.

12.
China Tropical Medicine ; 23(4):338-341, 2023.
Article in Chinese | GIM | ID: covidwho-20245452

ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze the vaccination status of SARS-CoV-2 in children, and explore the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and COVID-19 in children. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 335 cases of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection from February 15, 2022 to March 18, 2022 in Shenzhen Third People's Hospital. Results: Among 335 children with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 174(51.9%) cases were vaccinated with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine;33(31.4%) cases were vaccinated in the 3-<6 years old group;141(61.3%) cases were vaccinated in the 6-<14 years old group. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination between the 6-<14 years old group and the 3-<6 years old group (X2=26.1, P < 0.05). In the study cohort, 3-<6 years old group and 6-<14 years old group, there was no significant difference in the incidence of COVID-19 in the vaccinated group compared with the unvaccinated group (P > 0.05). In the study cohort, the proportion of confirmed cases of 1 dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and 2 doses or more of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was 89.5% (68 cases) and 77.6% (76 cases), respectively;in the 6~<14 years old group, the proportion of confirmed cases of 1 dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and 2 doses or more of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was 90.0% (54 cases) and 76.5% (62 cases), respectively;the differences were statistically significant (X2=4.264, P < 0.05;X2=4.279, P < 0.05). The IgG levels of 18.28 (6.61, 55.2) AU/mL and 58.3 (25.85, 131.41) AU/mL in the study cohort who were vaccinated for 1 dose, 2 doses and more, respectively;the IgG levels of 20.13 (8.33, 44.33) AU/mL and 56.57 (25.85, 150.07) AU/mL in the 6~<14 years old group who were vaccinated for 1 dose, 2 doses and more, respectively;and the differences were statistically significant (Z=-4.37, P < 0.05;Z=-3.96, P < 0.05). Conclusions: Children who received 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine have a lower incidence of COVID-19 and higher levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies compared with who received 1 dose. It is recommended that children are advised to be vaccinated against the COVID-19.

13.
One Health Bulletin ; 3(7), 2023.
Article in English | GIM | ID: covidwho-20245376

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 vaccines provide a high degree of protection against severe disease, hospitalisation, and death. However, no vaccine claimed 100% effectiveness and it is expected that a small proportion of vaccinated individuals may develop a breakthrough infection due to individual differences, virus variants and other factors. We conducted an epidemiological investigation and analysis of an imported case who had finished four doses of vaccination, and in order to provide a relevant reference for regular epidemic prevention and control in the post-pandemic era.

14.
Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering ; 12611, 2023.
Article in English | Scopus | ID: covidwho-20245326

ABSTRACT

The immune system is developed to preserve its hosts from an ever-expanding cluster of pathogenic microbes. The elimination of toxic substances, allergens, or any other harmful existences that come in, passing the mucosal surfaces, is as well the responsibility of this special system. Its ability to distinguish self (our bodies' functioning cells and tissues) from non-self is the key aspect to its ability to mobilize some reaction to an invasion initiated by the stranger substances listed above. To identify and kill unsafe microorganisms, the host applies both natural and versatile systems, our innate and adaptive immune systems. Vaccines are used to combat the current SARS-CoV-2 strain by utilizing immune system mechanisms, specifically the adaptive immune system. Vectored vaccines, protein vaccines, genetic vaccine, and monoclonal antibody for passive vaccination are among the vaccine platforms under consideration for SARS-CoV-2. Each vaccine has its own benefits and drawbacks. This paper is written to describe the three major forms of COVID-19 vaccines, as well as the unique mechanisms of elements of the immune system associated with the virus. © 2023 SPIE.

15.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 82(Suppl 1):1881, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20245183

ABSTRACT

BackgroundFlare of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) following COVID-19 vaccination has been reported with a low occurrence observed in those patients with disease remission. However, no local data is available in our multi-ethnic Malaysian population.ObjectivesTo evaluate the prevalence of RA flare in Malaysian patients following COVID-19 vaccination and its associated risk factors.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study assessing RA flare based on patient-reported disease flare through self-administered questionnaires and physician-reported flare. Patient self-reported disease flare was defined as ‘a sudden worsening of rheumatology condition or arthritis within 1 month post-vaccination' while physician-reported flare was defined as ‘an increment of disease activity score 28-joint documented within 3 months post-vaccination‘ from either a scheduled or unscheduled clinic visit. A total of 186 RA patients attended the rheumatology clinic in Hospital Putrajaya from May to July 2022 who completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination under the Malaysian National Vaccination Programme were recruited. Demographic data, disease parameters including serology for rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA), cessation of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) around vaccination, type of vaccines and adverse events were examined using descriptive and univariate analyses.ResultsMajority (93%) of RA patients enrolled were female with a mean age of 58 years old (standard deviation, SD 12.2) and mean disease duration was 12 years (SD 7.7). More than half were seropositive (66% RF, 63% ACPA) with 47.4% had double seropositivity (RF and ACPA positive). All patients received DMARDs with the majority (71%) were on methotrexate (MTX), 21.5% were on leflunomide, 17.7% on other DMARDs, with a small proportion (14%) of patients were receiving prednisolone. Only 4.8% of patients were on biologics or targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Half of the patients were in remission prior to vaccination. 62% of patients received Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine as the primary vaccine, followed by Sinovac-CoronaVac (24.6%) and Oxford-AstraZeneca (13.4%) vaccines. A booster dose had been administered to 80% of patients, of which 88.7% was Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. MTX therapy were discontinued in 39.4% of patients (n=52) post-vaccination for a week duration. The prevalence of RA flare was only 12.9% (n=24) in which 14 were self-reported and 10 were physician-reported flares (4 severe flare, 6 mild-moderate flare). Flare rates were higher during the first and second dose of vaccination with 29.2% respectively, and only 12.5% were reported after booster vaccination. Common vaccine adverse effects were fever (16.8%), myalgia (8.6%) and arthralgia (6.4%). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of flare post-vaccination between age, gender, disease activity prior to vaccination, types of vaccine, usage of MTX and prednisolone, and discontinuation of MTX post-vaccination. Although seropositivity did not exhibit statistically significant flare rate post vaccination, sub-analysis revealed four times higher rate of flare in those who has double positivity compared to seronegative RA patients (12% vs 4%).ConclusionPrevelance of RA flare post-COVID-19 vaccination in Malaysian RA population is low. No significant associated risk factors were identified although double seropositivity appeared to have higher number of flares.References[1]Bixio, R., Bertelle, D., Masia, M., Pistillo, F., Carletto, A. and Rossini, M. (2021), Incidence of Disease Flare After BNT162b2 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Remission. ACR Open Rheumatology, 3: 832-833.[2]Li X, Tong X, Yeung WWY, Kuan P, Yum SHH, Chui CSL, Lai FTT, Wan EYF, Wong CKH, Chan EWY, Lau CS, Wong ICK. Two-dose COVID-19 vaccination and possible arthritis flare among patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Hong Kong. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022 Apr;81(4):564-568.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.

16.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 82(Suppl 1):952-953, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20245091

ABSTRACT

BackgroundComprehensive and large-scale assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) worldwide is lacking. The second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey assessing several aspects of COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to outline patient experience in various autoimmune diseases (AIDs), with a particular focus on IIMs.ObjectivesTo investigate physical and mental health in a global cohort of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls), using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data obtained from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsDemographics, AID diagnoses, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments, and PROMs were extracted from the COVAD-2 database. The primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores. Each outcome was compared between IIMs, non-IIM AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 1582 IIMs, 4700 non-IIM AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls, which accrued as of May 2022, were analysed. Patients with IIMs were older [59±14 (IIMs) vs. 48±14 (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45±14 (NRAIDs) vs. 40±14 (controls) years, p<0.001] and more likely to be Caucasian [82.7% (IIMs) vs. 53.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 62.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 34.5% (controls), p<0.001]. Among IIMs, dermatomyositis (DM) and juvenile DM were the most common (31.4%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (24.9%). Patients with IIMs were more likely to have comorbidities [68.1% (IIMs) vs. 45.7% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45.1% (NRAIDs) vs. 26.3% (controls), p<0.001] including mental disorders [33.4% (IIMs) vs. 28.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 28.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 17.9% (controls), p<0.001].GPH median scores were lower in IIMs compared to NRAIDs or controls [13 (interquartile range 10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (11–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 15 (13–17) NRAIDs vs. 17 (15–18) controls, p<0.001] and PROMIS PF-10a median scores were the lowest in IIMs [34 (25–43) IIMs vs. 40 (34–46) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 47 (40–50) NRAIDs vs. 49 (45–50) controls, p<0.001]. GMH median scores were lower in AIDs including IIMs compared to controls [13 (10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (10–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 13 (11–16) NRAIDs vs. 15 (13–17) controls, p<0.001]. Pain VAS median scores were higher in AIDs compared to controls [3 (1–5) IIMs vs. 4 (2–6) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 2 (0–4) NRAIDs vs. 0 (0–2) controls, p<0.001]. Of note, PROMIS Fatigue-4a median scores were the highest in IIMs [11 (8–14) IIMs vs. 8 (10–14) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 9 (7–13) NRAIDs vs. 7 (4–10) controls, p<0.001].Multivariable regression analysis in IIMs identified older age, male sex, IBM, comorbidities including hypertension and diabetes, active disease, glucocorticoid use, increased pain and fatigue as the independent factors for lower GPH scores, whereas coexistence of interstitial lung disease, mental disorders including anxiety disorder and depression, active disease, increased pain and fatigue were the independent factors for lower GMH scores.ConclusionBoth physical and mental health are significantly impaired in patients with IIMs compared to those with non-IIM AIDs or those without AIDs. Our results call for greater attention to patient-reported experience and comorbidities including mental disorders to provide targeted approaches and optimise global well-being in patients with IIMs.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42:2151–58.AcknowledgementsThe authors a e grateful to all respondents for completing the questionnaire. The authors also thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren's India Foundation, EULAR PARE for their contribution to the dissemination of the survey. Finally, the authors wish to thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the data collection.Disclosure of InterestsAkira Yoshida: None declared, Yuan Li: None declared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, Janssen, Astellas, Bayer, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Chugai, Eisai, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Nippon Shinyaku, Pfizer, Consultant of: Corbus, Mochida, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Ashima Makol Consultant of: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Parikshit Sen: None declared, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: CSL Limited, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Mrudula Joshi: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Grant/research support from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Arvind Nune: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra Consultant of: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Medscape, Novartis, Consultant of: 4P-Pharma, AbbVie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Altavant, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, AstraZeneca, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galderma, Galapagos, Glenmark, Gossamer, iQvia, Horizon, Inventiva, Janssen, Kymera, Lupin, Medscape, Merck, Miltenyi Biotec, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Prometheus, Redxpharma, Roivant, Sanofi, Topadur, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kymera, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Hector Chinoy Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly, UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Mallinckrodt, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Bristol Myers-Squibb, EMD Serono, Kezar, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Alexion, Argenx, Boehringer Ingelheim (BI), Corbus, Janssen, Kyverna, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Abbvie, Scipher, Horizontal Therapeutics, Teva, Biogen, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceutical, Nuvig, Capella, CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Mallinckrodt, Janssen, Q32, EMD Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Latika Gupta: None declared.

17.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 82(Suppl 1):968-969, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20245082

ABSTRACT

BackgroundThe second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey designed to evaluate several facets covering COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a variety of autoimmune diseases (AIDs), including systemic sclerosis (SSc). Detailed assessment of the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and its drivers in patients with SSc is lacking.ObjectivesTo assess physical and mental health in a global cohort of SSc patients in comparison with non-SSc autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsThe COVAD-2 database was used to extract demographics, AID diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, current therapies, and PROMs. PROMIS global physical health (GPH), global mental health (GMH) scores, PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were compared between SSc, non-SSc AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Outcomes were also compared between diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc) vs limited cutaneous SSc (lcSSc). Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing GPH and GMH scores in SSc.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 276 SSc, 6006 non-SSc AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls as of May 2022 were included in the analysis. Respondents with SSc were older [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 55 (14) vs. 51 (15) vs. 45 (14) vs. 40 (14) years old, mean (SD), p < 0.001]. Among patients with SSc, 129 (47%) had dcSSc and 147 (53%) had lcSSc. SSc patients reported a significantly higher prevalence of ILD [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 30.4% vs. 5.5% vs. 1.5% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001], and treatment with MMF [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 26.4% vs. 9.5% vs. 1.1% vs. 0%, p < 0.001].Patients with SSc had lower GPH and PROMIS PF-10a scores [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 13 (11–15) vs. 13 (11–15) vs. 15 (13–17) vs. 17 (15–18), median (IQR), p < 0.001;39 (33–46) vs. 39 (32–45) vs. 47 (40–50) vs. 49 (45–50), p < 0.001, respectively] and higher Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores compared to those with NRAIDs or controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 3 (2–5) vs. 3 (1–6) vs. 2 (0–4) vs. 0 (0–2), p < 0.001;11 (8–14) vs. 11 (8–14) vs. 9 (7–13) vs. 7 (4–10), p < 0.001, respectively]. Patients with AIDs including SSc had lower GMH scores compared to controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 12.5 (10–15) vs. 13 (10–15) vs. 13 (11–16) vs. 15 (13–17), p < 0.001].Among SSc patients, GPH, GMH, and PROMIS PF-10a scores were lower in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [dcSSc vs. lcSSc: 12 (10–14) vs. 14 (11–15), p < 0.001;12 (10-14) vs. 13 (10-15), p<0.001;38 (30–43) vs. 41 (34–47), p < 0.001, respectively]. Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were higher in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [4 (2–6) vs. 3 (1–5), p < 0.001;12 (8–15) vs. 9 (8–13), p < 0.001, respectively].The independent factors for lower GPH scores in SSc were older age, Asian ethnicity, glucocorticoid use, and higher pain and fatigue scales, while mental health disorders and higher pain and fatigue scales were independently associated with lower GMH scores.ConclusionIn a global cohort, patient-reported physical and mental health were significantly worse in patients with SSc in comparison to those with non-SSc AIDs and without AIDs. Our findings support the critical need for more attention to patient's subjective experiences including pain and fatigue to improve the HRQOL in patients with SSc.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42: 2151–58.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsKeina Yomono: None declared, Yuan Li: None dec ared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Akira Yoshida: None declared, Kshitij Jagtap: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova Speakers bureau: Pfizer and AstraZeneca, Parikshit Sen: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Ashima Makol: None declared, Dey Dzifa: None declared, Carlos Enrique Toro Gutierrez: None declared, Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Aarat Patel: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Latika Gupta: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Asahi-Kasei, Astellas, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, MBL, Mochida, Nippon Shinyaku, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Consultant of: Astra Zeneka, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Corbus, GSK, Horizon, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Grant/research support from: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Vikas Agarwal: None declared.

18.
Chinese Journal of Zoology ; 57(6):951-962, 2022.
Article in Chinese | CAB Abstracts | ID: covidwho-20244972

ABSTRACT

Many zoonotic diseases are found in wild animals and present a serious risk to human health, in particularly the virus carried by birds flying freely around the world is hard to control. There are three main bird migration routes which cover the most areas of China. It is important to investigate and fully understand the types of avian transmitted diseases in key areas on the bird migration routines and its impacts on both birds and human health. However, no literature is available in how about the risk of virus carried by migrating birds, and how to predict and reduce this risk of virus spreading to human being so far. In this paper, we first reviewed the main pathogen types carried by birds, including coronaviruses, influenza viruses, parasites, Newcastle disease virus (NDV), etc., and then discussed the spread risk of avian viruses to human being and animals in key areas of biosafety prevention. We also analyzed and discussed the risk of cross-spread of diseases among different bird species in nature reserves located on bird migration routes which provide sufficient food sources for migratory birds and attract numerous birds. Diseases transmitted by wild birds pose a serious threat to poultry farms, where high density of poultry may become avian influenza virus (AIV) reservoirs, cause a risk of avian influenza outbreaks. Airports are mostly built in suburban areas or remote areas with good ecological environment. There are important transit places for bird migration and densely populated areas, which have serious risk of disease transmission. Finally, this paper puts forward the following prevention suggestions from three aspects. First, establish and improve the monitoring and prediction mechanism of migratory birds, and use laser technology to prevent contact between wild birds and poultry. Second, examine and identify virus types carried by birds in their habitats and carry out vaccination. Third, protect the ecological environment of bird habitat, and keep wild birds in their natural habitat, so as to reduce the contact between wild birds and human and poultry, and thus reduce the risk of virus transmission.

19.
Sustainability ; 15(11):8655, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20244953

ABSTRACT

Education plays a critical role in promoting preventive behaviours against the spread of pandemics. In Japan, handwashing education in primary schools was positively correlated with preventive behaviours against COVID-19 transmission for adults in 2020, during the early stages of COVID-19. The following year, the Tokyo Olympics were held in Japan, and a state of emergency was declared several times. Public perceptions of and risks associated with the pandemic changed drastically with the emergence of COVID-19 vaccines. We re-examined whether the effect of handwashing education on preventive behaviours persisted by covering a longer period of the COVID-19 pandemic than previous studies. A total of 26 surveys were conducted nearly once a month for 30 months from March 2020 (the early stage of COVID-19) to September 2022 in Japan. By corresponding with the same individuals across surveys, we comprehensively gathered data on preventive behaviours during this period. In addition, we asked about the handwashing education they had received in their primary school. We used the data to investigate how and to what degree school education is associated with pandemic-mitigating preventive behaviours. We found that handwashing education in primary school is positively associated with behaviours such as handwashing and mask wearing as a COVID-19 preventive measure but not related to staying at home. We observed a statistically significant difference in handwashing between adults who received childhood handwashing education and those who did not. This difference persisted throughout the study period. In comparison, the difference in mask wearing between the two groups was smaller but still statistically significant. Furthermore, there was no difference in staying at home between them. Childhood hygiene education has resulted in individuals engaging in handwashing and mask wearing to cope with COVID-19. Individuals can form sustainable development-related habits through childhood education.

20.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 82(Suppl 1):1870, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20244935

ABSTRACT

BackgroundVaccination remains essential in preventing morbidity of SARS-CoV-2 infections. We previously showed that >10mg/day prednisolone and methotrexate use were associated with reduced antibody concentrations four weeks after primary vaccination in patients with giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) [1].ObjectivesHere, we performed a follow-up study to measure the decay of antibody concentrations over time and the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination.MethodsGCA/PMR patients included in the primary vaccination (BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1) study were asked again to donate blood samples six months after primary vaccination (n=24) and one month after booster vaccination (n=46, BNT162b2 or mRNA1273). Data were compared to that of age-, sex-, and vaccine-matched controls (n=58 and n=42, respectively).ResultsAntibody concentrations decreased faster over time in GCA/PMR patients than in controls, but this decrease was not associated with treatment during primary vaccination. Post-booster antibody concentrations were comparable between patients and controls. Antibody concentrations post booster vaccination associated strongly with antibody concentrations post primary vaccination, but not with treatment during booster vaccination. However, the fold-change of post-booster vaccination showed a slight negative correlation with the post-primary vaccine antibodies.ConclusionThese results indicate that patients with impaired vaccine responses after primary vaccination, have slightly stronger increases in humoral immunity after booster vaccination, but this is not enough to reach a similar protection. The decrease in humoral immunity, and subsequent increase after booster vaccination, is likely not impacted by prednisolone or methotrexate treatment. Rather, these treatments put the patients at an immunogenic disadvantage during primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, which is not fully repaired by a single booster vaccination. This longitudinal study in GCA/PMR patients stresses the importance of repeat booster vaccination for patients that used >10mg/day prednisolone or methotrexate during primary vaccination.Reference[1]van Sleen Y, van der Geest, Kornelis SM, Reitsema RD, Esen I, Terpstra JH, Raveling-Eelsing E, et al. Humoral and cellular SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses in patients with giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica. RMD open 2022;8(2):e002479.Figure 1.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsYannick van Sleen: None declared, Kornelis van der Geest Speakers bureau: Speaker fees from Roche, Grant/research support from: Grant support from Abbvie, Annemarie Buisman: None declared, Maria Sandovici: None declared, Debbie van Baarle: None declared, Elisabeth Brouwer: None declared.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL