Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 42
Filter
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38929018

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Projects for workplace health promotion (WHP) for back pain traditionally focus exclusively on work-related but not on leisure-time stress on the spine. We developed a comprehensive WHP project on the back health of hospital workers regardless of the physical characteristics of their work and compared its effects on sedentary and physically active hospital workers. METHODS: Study assessments were carried out before and six months after participation in the WHP intervention. The primary outcome parameter was back pain (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI). Anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), work ability (Work Ability Index), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), stress (Perceived Stress Scale-10), and quality of life (Short Form-36) were assessed via questionnaires as secondary outcome parameters. Physical performance was measured via the 30 seconds Sit-to-Stand test (30secSTS). RESULTS: Sixty-eight healthcare workers with non-specific back pain were included in the evaluation study of the WHP project "Back Health 24/7/365". After six months, back pain, physical performance, and self-perceived physical functioning (SF-36 Physical Functioning subscale) improved significantly in both groups. Not a single parameter showed an interaction effect with the group allocation. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive WHP-intervention showed significant positive effects on hospital workers regardless of the physical characteristics of their work.


Subject(s)
Back Pain , Health Promotion , Occupational Health , Personnel, Hospital , Humans , Health Promotion/methods , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Personnel, Hospital/psychology , Workplace/psychology , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
J Clin Virol ; 173: 105661, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38503118

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Various SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns (VOCs) characterized by higher transmissibility and immune evasion have emerged. Despite reduced vaccine efficacy against VOCs, currently available vaccines provide protection. Population-based evidence on the humoral immune response after booster vaccination is crucial to guide future vaccination strategies and in preparation for imminent COVID-19 waves. METHODS: This multicenter, population-based cohort study included 4697 individuals ≥18 years of age who received a booster vaccination. Antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) and neutralizing antibodies against wild-type (WT) virus and Omicron variants were assessed at baseline (day of booster vaccination) and after four weeks. Safety was evaluated daily within the first week using a participant-completed electronic diary. Antibody levels were compared across different vaccination strategies, taking into account individual host factors. RESULTS: Our main model including 3838 participants revealed that individuals who received a booster with mRNA-1273 compared to BNT162b2 vaccine had a significantly higher increase (95 %CI) in anti-RBD-antibody levels (37,707 BAU/mL [34,575-40,839] vs. 27,176 BAU/mL [26,265-28,087]), and of neutralization levels against WT (1,681 [1490-1872] vs. 1141 [1004-1278] and Omicron variant (422 [369-474] vs. 329 [284-374]). Neutralizing antibody titres highly correlated with anti-RBD antibodies, with neutralizing capacity 4.4 fold higher against WT compared to Omicron. No differences in safety were found between the two booster vaccines. CONCLUSION: Our study underlines the superiority of a booster vaccination with mRNA-1273, independent of the primary vaccination and therefore provides guidance on the vaccination strategy.


Subject(s)
2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Male , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Middle Aged , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/immunology , Aged , Cohort Studies , Vaccination , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Young Adult
3.
Wien Klin Wochenschr ; 136(7-8): 209-214, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37256421

ABSTRACT

In view of the recent revival of interest in circadian biology and circadian epidemiology at the Medical University of Vienna, it seems appropriate to highlight the rich and pioneering history of circadian research in Austria. Among the forefathers of circadian research in Vienna are Otto Marburg (1874-1948), who discovered important elements of the pineal gland physiology, Robert Hofstätter (1883-1970), who used pineal gland extract in obstetrics/gynecology, and Paul Engel (1907-1997), who discovered that the pineal gland was controlled by light. More recently, Vera Lapin (1920-2007) showed that surgical removal of the pineal gland increased tumor growth, while Franz Waldhauser (*1946) investigated melatonin in conjunction with night work. Michael Kundi (*1950) and his team conducted among the first studies demonstrating differences in rhythms of night workers and early evidence for health impairments among them. Furthermore, Vienna-born Erhard Haus (1926-2013) pioneered the discovery of the role and importance of melatonin in relation to numerous diseases. This rich pioneering contribution of scientists in Vienna or with roots in Vienna is continued today by a new generation of chronobiologists, epidemiologists and clinicians in Vienna whose new insights contribute to the rapidly developing field of circadian rhythms research. Current topics and contributions relate to the impact of circadian rhythm disruption on health, and the application of chronotherapeutic approaches in clinical and preventive settings.


Subject(s)
Melatonin , Pineal Gland , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Melatonin/physiology , Austria , Circadian Rhythm/physiology , Pineal Gland/physiology
5.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 10: 1253951, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37869170

ABSTRACT

Background: Physical activity (PA) is beneficial for preventing several conditions associated with underlying chronic inflammation, e. g., cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. While an active lifestyle appears to have anti-inflammatory effects, high levels of occupational PA (OPA) were associated with inflammation and elevated mortality risks. We aimed to summarize the current knowledge (1) on the association between inflammation and OPA and (2) its implications for health and mortality. Methods and results: This mini-review summarized relevant literature published before January 2023 using established scientific databases and sources. For the primary outcome, observational studies (S) reporting immunological effects (O) in subjects (P), with high (I) vs. low OPA (C), were included. For secondary outcomes, i.e., morbidity and mortality associated with inflammatory processes, (systematic) reviews were included. While "active" occupations and "moderate" OPA appear to have beneficial effects, low (particularly sedentary) and "high-intensity" OPA (particularly including heavy lifting tasks) were associated with inflammation and (CVD and cancer-related) mortality; higher leisure-time PA has been almost consistently associated with lower proinflammatory markers and all-cause mortality risks. Workplace interventions appear to counter some of the observed health effects of unfavorable work strain. Conclusion: The few studies addressing OPA "intensity" and inflammatory markers are largely heterogeneous regarding OPA classification and confounder control. Sedentary and "heavy" OPA appear to promote proinflammatory effects. In addition to targeted management of work-related physical strain and hazardous environmental co-factors, occupational health providers should focus on employer-initiated exercise interventions and the promotion of leisure-time PA.

6.
J Infect Public Health ; 16(9): 1379-1385, 2023 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37437431

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the early SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, all healthcare workers had specific and essential functions. However, environmental services (e.g., cleaning staff) and allied health professionals (e.g., physiotherapists) are often less recognised inpatient care. The aim of our study was to evaluate SARS-CoV-2-infection rates and describe risk factors relevant to workplace transmission and occupational safety amongst healthcare workers in COVID-19 hospitals before the introduction of SARS-CoV-2-specific vaccines. METHODS: This cross-sectional study (from May 2020 to March 2021, standardised WHO early-investigation protocol) is evaluating workplace or health-related data, COVID-19-patient proximity, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, and adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) measures, anti-SARS-CoV-2-antibody status, and transmission pathways. RESULTS: Out of n = 221 HCW (n = 189 cleaning/service staff; n = 32 allied health professionals), n = 17 (7.7 %) were seropositive. While even SARS-CoV-2-naïve HCW reported SARS-CoV-2-related symptoms, airway symptoms, loss of smell or taste, and appetite were the most specific for a SARS-CoV-2-infection. Adherence to IPC (98.6 %) and recommended PPE use (98.2 %) were high and not associated with seropositivity. In 70.6 %, transmission occurred in private settings; in 23.5 %, at the workplace (by interaction with SARS-CoV-2-positive colleagues [17.6 %] or patient contact [5.9 %]), or remained unclear (one case). CONCLUSIONS: Infection rates were higher in all assessed 'less visible' healthcare-worker groups compared to the general population. Our data indicates that, while IPC measures and PPE may have contributed to the prevention of patient-to-healthcare-worker transmissions, infections were commonly acquired outside of work and transmitted between healthcare workers within the hospital. This finding emphasises the importance of ongoing education on transmission prevention and regular infection screenings at work.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel , Allied Health Personnel , Personnel, Hospital , COVID-19 Vaccines
7.
J Bone Miner Res ; 38(7): 943-950, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37126438

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection has been associated with musculoskeletal manifestations, including a negative effect on bone health. Bone formation was found to be reduced in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The aim of this case-control study was to determine whether bone metabolism is coupled or uncoupled in COVID-19 patients with moderately severe disease, the latter expressed by the requirement of hospitalization but not intensive care treatment, no need for mechanical ventilation, and a C-reactive protein level of (median [quartiles], 16.0 [4.0; 52.8]) mg/L in serum. Besides standard biochemical markers, serum levels of C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase, osteocalcin, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, sclerostin, dickkopf-1, and osteoprotegerin were evaluated in COVID-19-infected patients at the time of hospital admission, along with those of age- and sex-matched noninfected controls. The median age of the 14 female and 11 male infected patients included in the matched-pair analysis was (67 [53; 81]) years. C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients (0.172 [0.097; 0.375] ng/mL) than in controls (0.462 [0.300; 0.649] ng/mL; p = 0.011). The patients' osteocalcin levels (10.50 [6.49; 16.26] ng/mL) were also lower than those of controls (15.33 [11.85, 19.63] ng/mL, p = 0.025). Serum levels of sclerostin and dickkopf-1 were significantly higher in infected patients relative to controls. The remaining parameters did not differ between cases and controls. A limitation of the study was that patients and controls were recruited from different hospitals. Nevertheless, due to the geographical proximity of the two centers, we assume that this fact did not influence the results of the study. Given this limitation, the investigation showed that bone metabolism is altered but remains coupled in patients with moderately severe COVID-19. Therefore, it is important to evaluate bone turnover markers and fracture risk in these patients during the postinfection period. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Collagen Type I , Humans , Male , Female , Peptides , Case-Control Studies , Osteocalcin , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Biomarkers , Bone Remodeling , Bone Density
8.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 29(5): 635-641, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36509374

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the immunogenicity and safety of BNT162b2 booster vaccination with and without a tetravalent influenza vaccine. METHODS: A prospective, open-label cohort study on immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 booster vaccination with or without a tetravalent influenza vaccine was performed. Eight hundred thirty-eight health care workers were included in the following study arms: BNT162b2 booster-only, influenza-vaccine-only or combination of both. Levels of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain, and haemagglutinin inhibition tested for four different influenza strains (A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), B/Victoria, B/Yamagata) were measured at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later. RESULTS: After 4 weeks, median (interquartile range) levels of antibodies against the receptor binding domain of the viral spike (S) protein and relative change from baseline were high in individuals who received BNTb162b2 booster vaccination only (absolute: 16 600 [10 980-24 360] vs. 12 630 [8198-18 750] BAU/mL [p < 0.0001]; relative increase: 49% [23.6-95.3] vs. 40% [21.9-80.6] [p 0.048]; booster-only n = 521 vs. combination-arm n = 229 respectively). Results were confirmed after matching for sex, age, body mass index, baseline antibody levels and vaccine compound received for primary immunization (absolute: 13 930 [10 610-22 760] vs. 12 520 [8710-17 940]; [p 0.031]; relative increase: 55.7% [27.8-98.5] vs. 42.2% [22.9-74.5]; p 0.045). Adverse events were almost identical in the booster-only and the combination-arm, but numerically low in the influenza arm (525/536 [97.9%] vs. 235/240 [97.9%] vs. 26/33 [78.8 %]). DISCUSSION: Although no safety concerns occurred, our study provides evidence on reduced immunogenicity of a BNT162b2 booster vaccination in combination with a tetravalent influenza vaccine. Further studies investigating new influenza variants as well as potential differences vaccine effectiveness are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/etiology , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccines, Inactivated
9.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(5): 816-823, 2023 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36328594

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An understanding vaccine-dependent effects on protective and sustained humoral immune response is crucial to planning future vaccination strategies against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this multicenter, population-based, cohort study including 4601 individuals after primary vaccination against COVID-19 ≥ 4 months earlier we compared factors associated with residual antibody levels against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) across different vaccination strategies (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or ChAdOx1). RESULTS: Our main model including 3787 individuals (2 × BNT162b2, n = 2271; 2 × mRNA-1273, n = 251; 2 × ChAdOx1, n = 1265), predicted significantly lower levels of anti-RBD antibodies after 6 months in individuals vaccinated with ChAdOx1 (392.7 binding antibody units per milliliter [BAU/mL]) compared with those vaccinated with BNT162b2 (1179.5 BAU/mL) or mRNA-1273 (2098.2 BAU/mL). Vaccine-dependent association of antibody levels was found for age with a significant predicted difference in BAU/ml per year for BNT162b2 (-21.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], -24.7 to -18.3) and no significant association for mRNA-1273 (-4.0; 95% CI, -20.0 to 12.1) or ChAdOx1 (1.7; 95% CI, .2 to 3.1). The predicted decrease over time since full immunization was highest in mRNA-1273 (-23.4; 95% CI, -31.4 to -15.4) compared with BNT162b2 (-5.9; 95% CI, -7 to -4.8). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed population-based evidence of vaccine-dependent effects of age and time since full immunization on humoral immune response. Findings underline the importance of individualized vaccine selection, especially in elderly individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , Humans , BNT162 Vaccine , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control
10.
Disabil Rehabil ; 45(18): 2872-2878, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35980383

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Post-COVID fatigue significantly limits recovery and return-to-work in COVID-19 survivors. We aimed to assess the effects of physical exercising on post-COVID-19-symptoms, physical/mental capacities and workability within a workplace-health-promotion project in health-care personnel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two HCWs were enrolled in two groups based on Post-COVID-Functional Scale (PCFS) scores: (1) severe (SSG, n = 11) and (2) mild (MSG, n = 21) symptoms. The participants underwent an eight week exercise intervention program consisting of two supervised resistance exercise sessions per week plus individual aerobic exercise recommendations. Primary outcome-parameter for physical fitness was VO2peak. Further, physical function (6MWT, 30 s sit-to-stand test (30secSTS)), mental health (anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), stress (PSS-10), fatigue (BFI), resilience (BRS)), cognitive capacity (MoCA) and workability (WAI) were assessed at baseline, after 4 weeks and after completion of exercise intervention. RESULTS: VO2peak improved significantly in the SSG by 2.4 ml/kg/min (95% CI [1.48; 3.01], adj.p < 0.001) and non-significantly in the MSG by 1.27 ml/kg/min (adj.p = 0.096). Both groups significantly improved their 30secSTS (p = 0.0236) and 6MWT (p = 0.0252) outcomes in both follow-ups (4 weeks and 8 weeks after inclusion). The SSG improved more than the MSG in VO2peak and 6MWT both after 4 and 8 weeks, respectively, although not statistically significant; findings were vice versa for the 30secSTS. 30secSTS outcomes correlated significantly with mental health outcomes and workability. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID exercise intervention improved physical fitness, psychological outcomes and workability in HCWs. Cases with severe fatigue showed higher benefit levels compared to those with mild symptoms. The safe and highly feasible 30secSTS correlated well with physical and mental outcomes and better workability in COVID-19 survivors.Implications for rehabilitationPhysical exercising showed to be an effective intervention method in the rehabilitation of COVID-19 survivors suffering from post-COVID syndrome by positively affecting both physical and mental health.In health care workers suffering from post-COVID syndrome, increases in physical performance are directly related to improvements in work ability.The 30 s sit-to-stand test (30secSTS) showed promising results as clinical assessment tool.The results of this study indicate that physical exercising will need to play a large and substantial role over the next years in the rehabilitation of COVID-19 survivors suffering from post-COVID-19-syndrome as it positively affects both physical and mental dimensions of the post-COVID-19-syndrome as well as work ability.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Functional Status , Humans , Work Capacity Evaluation , Quality of Life , Exercise , Exercise Therapy , Fatigue , Delivery of Health Care
11.
World Allergy Organ J ; 15(9): 100668, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36185551

ABSTRACT

Background: The immunopathogenesis of cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is based on different mechanisms related to immune recognition of protein epitopes, which are affected by industrial processing. Purpose: The purpose of this WAO DRACMA paper is to: (i) give a comprehensive overview of milk protein allergens, (ii) to review their immunogenicity and allergenicity in the context of industrial processing, and (iii) to review the milk-related immune mechanisms triggering IgE-mediated immediate type hypersensitivity reactions, mixed reactions and non-IgE mediated hypersensitivities. Results: The main cow's milk allergens - α-lactalbumin, ß-lactoglobulin, serum albumin, caseins, bovine serum albumins, and others - may determine allergic reactions through a range of mechanisms. All marketed milk and milk products have undergone industrial processing that involves heating, filtration, and defatting. Milk processing results in structural changes of immunomodulatory proteins, leads to a loss of lipophilic compounds in the matrix, and hence to a higher allergenicity of industrially processed milk products. Thereby, the tolerogenic capacity of raw farm milk, associated with the whey proteins α-lactalbumin and ß-lactoglobulin and their lipophilic ligands, is lost. Conclusion: The spectrum of immunopathogenic mechanisms underlying cow's milk allergy (CMA) is wide. Unprocessed, fresh cow's milk, like human breast milk, contains various tolerogenic factors that are impaired by industrial processing. Further studies focusing on the immunological consequences of milk processing are warranted to understand on a molecular basis to what extent processing procedures make single milk compounds into allergens.

12.
J Occup Environ Med ; 64(8): 694-698, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35732038

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship among daily activities (paid work, childcare, caregiving, voluntary work, sports, and social contact), occupational balance, and depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Austrian Corona Panel Project (four time points, 6-month period) using regression models with logarithmically transformed data and nonparametric repeated-measures tests (N = 871). RESULTS: Results showed higher depressive symptoms among women. Family caregivers (either parents or those caring for other relatives) were at the highest risk for occupational imbalance and depressive symptoms. Sports and social contact were initially associated with better outcomes, but the effects waned. There was a main effect for time point driven by the last wave (amidst the second lockdown), but no significant interaction effects between predictors and time point were found. CONCLUSION: The results provide a nuanced depiction of the relationship between different daily activities and health-related outcomes during the pandemic, highlighting groups at risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Austria/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pandemics
13.
BMJ Open ; 12(3): e054516, 2022 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35256442

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To address structural determinants and healthcare workers' (HCWs) physical, mental, emotional and professional challenges of working during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Exploratory qualitative study with semistructured interviews. Collected data were analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: This qualitative study was undertaken with HCWs who mainly worked in intensive care units in six non-profit hospitals in Vienna, Austria. Data were collected from June 2020 to January 2021. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 30 HCWs (13 medical doctors, 11 qualified nursing staff, 2 nurse assistants, 2 physiotherapists and 2 technical/cleaning staff) who were in direct and indirect contact with patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: Three overall themes resulted as relevant: challenges due to lack of preparedness, structural conditions, and physical and mental health of HCWs. Lack of preparedness included delayed infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines, shortages of personal protective equipment combined with staff shortages (especially of nursing staff) and overworked personnel. Physical and mental strains resulted from HCWs being overworked and working permanently on alert to face medical uncertainties and the critical conditions of patients. HCWs lacked recognition on multiple levels and dealt with stigma and avoidance behaviour of colleagues. CONCLUSION: To mitigate HCWs' occupational health risks and staff turnover, we propose context-specific recommendations. The number of available essential workers in care of patients with COVID-19, especially nursing staff, should be carefully planned and increased to avert chronic work overload. Timely training and education in IPC for all HCWs is important. Providing supportive supervision is as essential as appropriate recognition by higher level management and the public.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Microbiol Spectr ; 10(1): e0140221, 2022 02 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35196824

ABSTRACT

Various commercial anti-Spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests are used for studies and in clinical settings after vaccination. An international standard for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies has been established to achieve comparability of such tests, allowing conversions to BAU/mL. This study aimed to investigate the comparability of antibody tests regarding the timing of blood collection after vaccination. For this prospective observational study, antibody levels of 50 participants with homologous AZD1222 vaccination were evaluated at 3 and 11 weeks after the first dose and 3 weeks after the second dose using two commercial anti-Spike binding antibody assays (Roche and Abbott) and a surrogate neutralization assay. The correlation between Roche and Abbott changed significantly depending on the time point studied. Although Abbott provided values three times higher than Roche 3 weeks after the first dose, the values for Roche were twice as high as for Abbott 11 weeks after the first dose and 5 to 6 times higher at 3 weeks after the second dose. The comparability of quantitative anti-Spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests was highly dependent on the timing of blood collection after vaccination. Therefore, standardization of the timing of blood collection might be necessary for the comparability of different quantitative SARS-COV-2 antibody assays. IMPORTANCE This work showed that the comparability of apparently standardized SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays (Roche, Abbott; both given in BAU/mL) after vaccination depends on the time of blood withdrawal. Initially (3 weeks after the first dose AZD1222), there were 3 times higher values in the Abbott assay, but this relationship inversed before boosting (11 weeks after the first dose) with Roche 2 times greater than Abbott. After the booster, Roche quantified ca. 5 times higher levels than Abbott. This must be considered by clinicians when interpreting SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination/trends , Adult , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Humans , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Time Factors , Vaccination/standards
15.
Allergy ; 77(9): 2594-2617, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35152450

ABSTRACT

The immune system interacts with many nominal 'danger' signals, endogenous danger-associated (DAMP), exogenous pathogen (PAMP) and allergen (AAMP)-associated molecular patterns. The immune context under which these are received can promote or prevent immune activating or inflammatory mechanisms and may orchestrate diverse immune responses in allergy and cancer. Each can act either by favouring a respective pathology or by supporting the immune response to confer protective effects, depending on acuity or chronicity. In this Position Paper under the collective term danger signals or DAMPs, PAMPs and AAMPs, we consider their diverse roles in allergy and cancer and the connection between these in AllergoOncology. We focus on their interactions with different immune cells of the innate and adaptive immune system and how these promote immune responses with juxtaposing clinical outcomes in allergy and cancer. While danger signals present potential targets to overcome inflammatory responses in allergy, these may be reconsidered in relation to a history of allergy, chronic inflammation and autoimmunity linked to the risk of developing cancer, and with regard to clinical responses to anti-cancer immune and targeted therapies. Cross-disciplinary insights in AllergoOncology derived from dissecting clinical phenotypes of common danger signal pathways may improve allergy and cancer clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity , Neoplasms , Humans , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity/etiology , Hypersensitivity/therapy , Immunity , Inflammation , Neoplasms/etiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Signal Transduction
16.
Wien Klin Wochenschr ; 134(7-8): 276-285, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34487198

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In aging healthcare professionals, multiple stressors such as night work may affect life and work satisfaction and risk for chronic diseases (e.g. cardiovascular disease [CVD]). In this pilot study we compared workability, quality of life (QoL), and CVD risk markers between night shift and day workers. METHODS: We included 70 hospital employees (mean age 52 ±â€¯4 years, 91.4% female): 32 rotating night shift workers (> 3 nights/month) and 38 permanent day workers. In addition to sociodemographic, lifestyle, and sleep characteristics, we assessed i) workability index (WAI), ii) QoL (World Health Organization Quality of Life [WHOQOL-Bref]) and iii) CVD risk markers, i.e. carotid ultrasound measurements, and biomarkers (NTproBNP, CRP, IL­6, LDL, ferritin, copper, zinc, and selenium). WAI, QoL, and CVD risk markers were compared between night and day workers. In a subgroup of participants (N = 38) with complete data, we used quantile regression analysis to estimate age and multivariate adjusted differences in biomarker levels. RESULTS: We found no differences in the domains of QoL (physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment) and WAI scores between night and day workers. Night shift workers were less likely to report excellent workability than day workers, although differences were not statistically significant. Night shift workers reported more sleep problems (73.1% vs. 55.6%) and tended to have lower zinc levels and higher inflammatory markers (CRP, IL­6, ferritin), but differences were not significant after adjusting for potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Workability, QoL and CVD markers did not significantly differ between rotating night shift and day workers in this small pilot study. Sleep problems and inflammatory marker levels carry implications for occupational health.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Sleep Wake Disorders , Aging , Biomarkers , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Ferritins , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , Interleukin-6 , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Quality of Life , Risk Factors , Work Schedule Tolerance , Zinc
19.
Allergo J Int ; 30(5): 169-175, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34277326

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Along with the newly approved vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), first reports of allergic or intolerance reactions were published. Subsequently, questions arose whether these vaccines pose an increased risk for intolerance reactions and whether allergic patients may be at higher risk for this. RESULTS: Allergic reactions following COVID-19 vaccinations have been reported, but mostly of mild severity and at normal (Moderna®) or only slightly increased frequency (BioNTech/Pfizer®) compared to established conventional vaccines. The risk of allergic reaction to the newly licensed vector vaccines (AstraZeneca®, Johnson&Johnson®) cannot be conclusively assessed yet, but also appears to be low. There is currently no evidence that patients with allergic diseases (atopic patients) react more frequently or more severely to these vaccines. It is currently assumed that intolerance reactions of the immediate-type are either type I allergic (IgE-mediated) reactions or occur via complement activation (CARPA, "complement activation-related pseudoallergy"). Polyethylene glycol (PEG) or polysorbate, which are present as stabilizers in the vaccines, are suspected as triggers for this. CONCLUSION: The data available so far do not show a significantly increased risk of immediate-type allergic reactions in atopic persons. In almost all cases, atopic patients can be vaccinated without problems. Standardized follow-up tests after suspected allergic reactions or CARPA-mediated reactions are currently limited.

20.
Int J Infect Dis ; 110: 309-313, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34332084

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody levels after the first dose of vaccine can predict the final antibody response, and whether this is dependent on the vaccine type. METHODS: Sixty-nine recipients of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) and 55 recipients of AZD1222 (AstraZeneca), without previous infection or immunosuppressive medication, were included in this study. Antibody levels were quantified 3 weeks after the first dose [directly before boostering in the case of AZD1222 (11 weeks after the first dose)] and 3 weeks after the second dose using the Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 S total antibody assay. RESULTS: Median pre-booster {BNT162b2: 80.6 [interquartile range (IQR) 25.5-167.0] binding antibody units (BAU)/mL; AZD1222: 56.4 (IQR 36.4-104.8) BAU/mL; not significant} and post-booster [BNT162b2: 2092.0 (IQR 1216.3-4431.8) BAU/mL; AZD1222: 957.0 (IQR 684.5-1684.8) BAU/mL; P<0.0001] levels correlated well in the recipients of BNT162b2 (ρ=0.53) but not in the recipients of AZD1222. Moreover, antibody levels after the first dose of BNT162b2 correlated inversely with age (ρ=-0.33, P=0.013), whereas a positive correlation with age was observed after the second dose in recipients of AZD1222 (ρ=0.26, P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that antibody levels quantified by the Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 S assay before the booster shot could infer post-booster responses to BNT162b2, but not to AZ1222. In addition, this study found a vaccine-dependent effect on antibody responses, where age seems to play an ambivalent role.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , Vaccination
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...