Comparison of the effectiveness of four SARS-COV-2 v accines in Nuevo Leon, Mexico: A test-negative control study / Comparación de la eficacia de 4 vacunas contra SARS-CoV-2 en Nuevo León, México: estudio de casos y controles

Objective: The objective of the present study was to provide statewide estimates of real-world effectiveness in reducing the odds of one primary (symptomatic COVID-19 infection) and two secondary outcomes (hospitalization and severe COVID-19 infection) by four vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca), Ad5-nCoV (CanSinoBIO), and CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences), used in Northeast Mexico. Design: We conducted a test-negative case-control study and analyzed statewide surveillance data from December 2020 to August 2021. Site: Primary attention and hospitalization. Participants: Two inclusion criteria were applied, age≥18 years and having a real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay or a rapid test for antigen detection in postnasal samples (N=164,052). The vaccination was considered complete if at least 14 days had passed since the application of the single or second dose and the beginning of symptomatology. Interventions: Does not apply. Main measurements: Point and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of vaccine effectiveness were calculated per type of vaccine using the formula 1 – odds ratio, adjusted by sex and age. Results: Complete vaccination offered from none (CoronaVac – Sinovac) to 75% (95%CI 71, 77) (BNT162b2 – Pfizer) effectiveness in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 infection, regardless of sex and age. The fully ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) scheme reached the maximum effectiveness in hospitalization (80%, 95%CI 69, 87) and the fully BNT162b2 (Pfizer) scheme the maximum effectiveness in severity (81%, 95%CI 64, 90). Conclusions: More studies are needed to compare benefits of different vaccines and guide policy makers select the best option for their population.(AU)

Objetivo: Proporcionar estimaciones en el ámbito estatal de la efectividad en el mundo real de reducir las probabilidades de un resultado primario (infección sintomática por COVID-19) y 2 resultados secundarios (hospitalización e infección grave por COVID-19) para 4 vacunas: BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca), Ad5-nCoV (CanSinoBIO) y CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences) utilizadas en el noreste de México. Diseño: Realizamos un estudio de casos y controles y analizamos los datos de vigilancia en todo el estado desde diciembre de 2020 hasta agosto de 2021. Emplazamiento: Atención primaria y hospitalización. Participantes: Se aplicaron 2 criterios de inclusión: edad ≥ 18 años y tener prueba de RT-PCR en tiempo real o una prueba rápida para la detección de antígeno en muestras posnasales (N=164.052). La vacunación se consideró completa si habían transcurrido al menos 14 días desde la aplicación de la dosis única o desde la segunda dosis hasta el inicio de la sintomatología. Intervenciones: No aplica. Mediciones principales: Se calcularon los puntos e intervalos de confianza (IC) del 95% de la efectividad de la vacuna por tipo de vacuna utilizando la fórmula 1: razón de probabilidades, ajustada por sexo y edad. Resultados: Vacunación completa que ofrece desde ninguna efectividad (CoronaVac-Sinovac) hasta el 75% de efectividad (IC95%: 71-77 de BNT162b2-Pfizer) en la reducción de la infección sintomática por COVID-19, independientemente del sexo y la edad. El esquema completo con ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) alcanzó la máxima efectividad en hospitalización (80%; IC95%: 69-87) y el esquema completo con BNT162b2 (Pfizer) la máxima efectividad en gravedad (81%; IC95%: 64-90). Conclusiones: Se necesitan más estudios para comparar los beneficios de las diferentes vacunas y para guiar a los responsables en la formulación de políticas a seleccionar la mejor opción para su población.(AU)

Comparison of the effectiveness of four SARS-COV-2 v accines in Nuevo Leon, Mexico: A test-negative control study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to provide statewide estimates of real-world effectiveness in reducing the odds of one primary (symptomatic COVID-19 infection) and two secondary outcomes (hospitalization and severe COVID-19 infection) by four vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca), Ad5-nCoV (CanSinoBIO), and CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences), used in Northeast Mexico. DESIGN: We conducted a test-negative case-control study and analyzed statewide surveillance data from December 2020 to August 2021. SITE: Primary attention and hospitalization. PARTICIPANTS: Two inclusion criteria were applied, age≥18 years and having a real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay or a rapid test for antigen detection in postnasal samples (N=164,052). The vaccination was considered complete if at least 14 days had passed since the application of the single or second dose and the beginning of symptomatology. INTERVENTIONS: Does not apply. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Point and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of vaccine effectiveness were calculated per type of vaccine using the formula 1 - odds ratio, adjusted by sex and age. RESULTS: Complete vaccination offered from none (CoronaVac - Sinovac) to 75% (95%CI 71, 77) (BNT162b2 - Pfizer) effectiveness in reducing symptomatic COVID-19 infection, regardless of sex and age. The fully ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) scheme reached the maximum effectiveness in hospitalization (80%, 95%CI 69, 87) and the fully BNT162b2 (Pfizer) scheme the maximum effectiveness in severity (81%, 95%CI 64, 90). CONCLUSIONS: More studies are needed to compare benefits of different vaccines and guide policy makers select the best option for their population.

Advances in gene therapy for hemophilia.

Hemophilia is a hereditary disorder that can be life-threatening in individuals who have severe spontaneous bleeding resulting from minor trauma or surgery. Although replacement therapy of the missing exogenous factor has improved patients' quality of life, it has not been possible to establish a long-term treatment. Due to the severity of the disease and the need for repetitive doses throughout the patient's life, replacement therapy has become a high-cost treatment option; therefore, the development of self-sustainable long-term therapies is critical. Hemophilia is a good candidate for gene therapy because it is a monogenic disease that can be counteracted by expression of the missing factor. In this article, we review some of the most relevant advances in gene therapy for this illness.