Satisfaction with COVID-19 Vaccines in Health Care Workers and the General Population: A Cross-Sectional Study in Urban Bangkok, Thailand.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy is a global issue. Many people are concerned about experiencing side effects from the vaccine. This study evaluated satisfaction with the COVID-19 vaccine in the general population (GP) and healthcare workers (HCWs) in Bangkok, Thailand. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed from September-December 2021. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare GP and HCW participants' total vaccine satisfaction scores as well as their satisfaction with varying vaccine types. Multiple linear regression was used to identify predictors of satisfaction scores among GP and HCWs. Results: A total of 780 valid questionnaire responses were obtained. The majority of GP participants (n = 390) had received their first (93.3%) and second (88.5%) vaccination shots by viral vector vaccine; however, 90% had not received a third dose (booster). In contrast, the majority of HCW participants (n = 390) had received their first (92.8%) and second (82.8%) vaccination doses by the inactivated vaccine, and 83% had received a third vaccine dose. HCWs had significantly higher total satisfaction scores than GP participants (p = 0.034), and they were also significantly more satisfied with the mRNA vaccine as a third dose (p = 0.001). Multiple linear regression models found less association with vaccine satisfaction among GP participants who had not isolated following exposure to COVID-19 and those who have never been at risk of infection (ᵦ −0.159; 95% CI −12.867, −1.877; p = 0.009). Among HCWs, being married (ᵦ 0.157; 95% CI 0.794, 3.278; p = 0.001) or divorced (ᵦ 0.198; 95% CI 3.303, 9.596; p < 0.01) was more closely associated with vaccine satisfaction than being single. Conclusion: HCWs were more satisfied with the type and efficacy of inactivated, viral vector, and mRNA vaccines than GP participants, and the former were also more satisfied with the cost of vaccine boosters. Our results indicate that satisfaction with the COVID-19 vaccine is based on academic knowledge sharing and the government's promotion efforts. Future research will explore strategies to raise awareness about the importance of vaccination.

The Relationship between Attitudes and Satisfaction Concerning the COVID-19 Vaccine and Vaccine Boosters in Urban Bangkok, Thailand: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a global concern. Many individuals are concerned about the potential side-effects of the COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine boosters. The purpose of this study was to assess attitudes and satisfaction concerning COVID-19 vaccines and vaccine boosters in the population in Bangkok, Thailand. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey measuring COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and satisfaction was distributed from September to December 2021. Multiple linear regression was used to explore associations between demographic variables and questionnaire results. Spearman's correlation analysis was used to examine associations between attitude and satisfaction scores. Results: A total of 780 questionnaire responses were obtained. The largest groups of participants reported having obtained a first vaccination dose via viral vaccine (52.8%), a second vaccination booster via viral vaccine (49.5%), and a third vaccination booster via mRNA vaccine (28.8%). Multiple linear regression revealed a lower association between vaccine attitude scores and having earned less than a bachelor's degree (ß −0.109; 95% CI −2.541, −0.451) and infection risk without self-isolating (ß −0.154; 95% CI −4.152, −0.670) compared with attaining a bachelor's degree or higher and never having being at risk of infection, respectively. Higher vaccine satisfaction scores were more closely associated with being married than being single (ß 0.074; 95% CI −0.073, 3.022), whereas lower vaccine satisfaction scores were less closely associated with non-healthcare workers (ß −0.143; 95% CI −4.698, −0.831) and infection risk without self-isolating (ß −0.132; 95% CI −6.034, −0.502) compared with non-healthcare workers and never being at risk of infection. There was weak but significant positive correlation between attitude and satisfaction scores (r = 0.338, p-value < 0.001). Hence, a gradual decline in protection following vaccination and the positive effects of a booster dose after primary vaccination have made the decision to administer booster doses. Conclusion: The results suggest that policymakers need to develop more effective strategies to raise awareness about the importance of vaccination.

Candidate cancer-targeting agents identified by expression-profiling arrays.

BACKGROUND: One particularly promising component of personalized medicine in cancer treatment is targeted therapy, which aims to maximize therapeutic efficacy while minimizing toxicity. However, the number of approved targeted agents remains limited. Expression microarray data for different types of cancer are resources to identify genes that were upregulated. The genes are candidate targets for cancer-targeting agents for future anticancer research and targeted treatments. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The gene expression profiles of 48 types of cancer from 2,141 microarrays reported in the Gene Expression Omnibus were analyzed. These data were organized into 78 experimental groups, on which we performed comprehensive analyses using two-tailed Student's t-tests with significance set at P < 0.01 to identify genes that were upregulated compared with normal cells in each cancer type. The resulting list of significantly upregulated genes was cross-referenced with three categories of protein inhibitor targets, categorized by inhibitor type ('Targets of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved anticancer drugs', 'Targets of FDA-approved nonantineoplastic drugs', or 'Targets of non-FDA-approved chemical agents'). Of the 78 experimental groups studied, 57 (73%) represent cancers that are currently treated with FDA-approved targeted treatment agents. However, the target genes for the indicated therapies are upregulated in only 33 of these groups (57%). Nevertheless, the mRNA expression of the genes targeted by FDA-approved treatment agents is increased in every experimental group, including all of the cancers without FDA-approved targeted treatments. Moreover, many targets of protein inhibitors that have been approved by the FDA as therapies for nonneoplastic diseases, such as 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase and cyclooxygenase-2 and the targets of many non-FDA-approved chemical agents, such as cyclin-dependent kinase 1 and DNA-dependent protein kinase, are also overexpressed in many types of cancer. CONCLUSION: This research demonstrates a clinical correlation between bioinformatics data and currently approved treatments and suggests novel uses for known protein inhibitors in future antineoplastic research and targeted therapies.

Genes associated with the cis-regulatory functions of intragenic LINE-1 elements.

BACKGROUND: Thousands of intragenic long interspersed element 1 sequences (LINE-1 elements or L1s) reside within genes. These intragenic L1 sequences are conserved and regulate the expression of their host genes. When L1 methylation is decreased, either through chemical induction or in cancer, the intragenic L1 transcription is increased. The resulting L1 mRNAs form RISC complexes with pre-mRNA to degrade the complementary mRNA. In this study, we screened for genes that are involved in intragenic L1 regulation networks. RESULTS: Genes containing L1s were obtained from L1Base (http://l1base.molgen.mpg.de). The expression profiles of 205 genes in 516 gene knockdown experiments were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo). The expression levels of the genes with and without L1s were compared using Pearson's chi-squared test. After a permutation based statistical analysis and a multiple hypothesis testing, 73 genes were found to induce significant regulatory changes (upregulation and/or downregulation) in genes with L1s. In detail, 5 genes were found to induce both the upregulation and downregulation of genes with L1s, whereas 27 and 37 genes induced the downregulation and upregulation, respectively, of genes with L1s. These regulations sometimes differed depending on the cell type and the orientation of the intragenic L1s. Moreover, the siRNA-regulating genes containing L1s possess a variety of molecular functions, are responsible for many cellular phenotypes and are associated with a number of diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Cells use intragenic L1s as cis-regulatory elements within gene bodies to modulate gene expression. There may be several mechanisms by which L1s mediate gene expression. Intragenic L1s may be involved in the regulation of several biological processes, including DNA damage and repair, inflammation, immune function, embryogenesis, cell differentiation, cellular response to external stimuli and hormonal responses. Furthermore, in addition to cancer, intragenic L1s may alter gene expression in a variety of diseases and abnormalities.