Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Document Type
Language
Clinical aspect
Year range
1.
Viruses ; 13(3)2021 03 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1457709

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Efficacy for cervical cancer prevention of opportunistic HPV vaccination in post-pubertal girls is lower than in 11-year-olds. METHODS: Women born between 1986 and 1992 vaccinated at 15-25 years of age (at least one dose of 4-valent HPV vaccine) and screened at 24-27 years of age were included. Frequency of opportunistic vaccination, overall and by birth cohort, was calculated; screening outcomes were compared between vaccinated and unvaccinated women. RESULTS: Overall, 4718 (4.9%) HPV-vaccinated, and 91,512 unvaccinated, women were studied. The frequency of vaccination increased by birth cohort, ranging between 1.8% and 9.8%; age at vaccination decreased progressively by birth cohort (p < 0.0001). Participation in screening was 60.8% among vaccinated, and 56.6% among unvaccinated, women (p < 0.0001). Detection rates (DR) for high-grade lesions were lower in vaccinated women (2.11‰ vs. 3.85‰ in unvaccinated, for CIN3+, p = 0.24; 0.0‰ vs. 0.22‰ for cancer). The DR of CIN3+ increased with age at vaccination, scoring respectively 0.0‰, 0.83‰, and 4.68‰ for women vaccinated when they were 15-16, 17-20, and 21-25 years old (p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to unvaccinated women, higher compliance with cervical cancer screening invitation and lower CIN3+ DR among vaccinated women was observed. Age at vaccination was inversely correlated to vaccination efficacy.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Mass Screening , Retrospective Studies , Young Adult
2.
Rambam Maimonides Med J ; 12(2)2021 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1156195

ABSTRACT

Children are infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as often as adults, but with fewer symptoms. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS) in children (MIS-C), with symptoms similar to Kawasaki syndrome, was described in young minors testing positive for COVID-19. The United States (US) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defined MIS-C as occurring in <21-year-olds, triggering hundreds of PubMed-listed papers. However, postpubertal adolescents are no longer children biologically; the term MIS-C is misleading. Furthermore, MIS also occurs in adults, termed MIS-A by the CDC. Acute and delayed inflammations can be triggered by COVID-19. The 18th birthday is an administrative not a biological age limit, whereas the body matures slowly during puberty. This blur in defining children leads to confusion regarding MIS-C/MIS-A. United States and European Union (EU) drug approval is handled separately for children, defined as <18-year-olds, ascribing non-existent physical characteristics up to the 18th birthday. This blur between the administrative and the physiological meanings for the term child is causing flawed demands for pediatric studies in all drugs and vaccines, including those against COVID-19. Effective treatment of all conditions, including COVID-19, should be based on actual physiological need. Now, the flawed definition for children in the development of drugs and vaccines and their approval is negatively impacting prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in minors. This review reveals the necessity for redefining pediatric age groups to rapidly establish recommendations for optimal prevention and treatment in minors.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...