RESUMEN
In the 2023–2024 season, the influenza epidemic in South Korea peaked earlier than in recent years. In this study, we aimed to estimate the interim vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the influenza vaccination to prevent influenza during the early season. From November 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023, we enrolled 2,632 subjects with influenza-like illness from eight hospitals participating in hospital-based influenza morbidity and mortality surveillance. A retrospective test-negative case-control study was conducted to estimate the VE. The results showed an adjusted VE of 22.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.6 to 35.8) for the total population. The adjusted VE was 22.3% (95% CI, 6.1 to 35.7) for influenza A and 9.4% (95% CI, −51.3 to 45.7) for influenza A/H1N1. Full results of the analysis will be reported.
RESUMEN
Background@#In Korea, there are no surveillance programs for vaccines that are not included in the national immunization program (NIP), and vaccine safety monitoring in the adult population is inadequate. This study aimed to establish a safety monitoring system for nonNIP vaccines in adults. @*Methods@#Frequently administered non-NIP vaccines were selected. Individuals were included if they received at least one of the selected vaccines at a participating institution and provided informed consent. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were monitored using questionnaires sent through text messages on days 1, 3, 7, 28, and 90 post-vaccination.Selected adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were monitored monthly by retrospective review of electronic medical records. Causality was assessed according to the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency guidelines. @*Results@#Four vaccines (tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis [Tdap], pneumococcal conjugate 13-valent [PCV13], live zoster vaccine [ZVL], and recombinant zoster vaccine [RZV]) were selected, and their safety profiles were monitored at four tertiary hospitals and 10 primary care clinics. The response rates of the questionnaires on post-vaccination days 1, 7, 28, and 90 were 99.2%, 93.6%, 81.0%, and 48.7%, respectively. Of 555 AESI identified over 10 months, 10 cases received one of the selected non-NIP vaccines within 90 days of the event. @*Conclusion@#We are establishing the first safety monitoring system for selected non-NIP vaccines in Korea since September 2022 and report its progress as of July 2023. However, continuous government support is essential for its maintenance and improvement.
RESUMEN
Background@#Bivalent booster mRNA vaccines containing the omicron-variant strains have been introduced worldwide in the autumn of 2022. Nevertheless, the omicron subvariants evoked another large coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic wave in late 2022 and early 2023. @*Methods@#A retrospective, test-negative, case-control study was conducted to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of bivalent COVID-19 vaccines in 8 university hospitals between January and February 2023. The case and control groups were divided based on nasopharyngeal COVID-19 real-time polymerase chain reaction results and matched based on age, sex, hospital, and date (week) of the test performed. The VE of the BA.1- or BA.4/BA.5-based mRNA vaccines were estimated. VE was calculated using the 1−adjusted odds ratio from multivariable logistic regression. @*Results@#In total, 949 patients and 947 controls were enrolled in this study. VE for the BA.4/ BA.5-based bivalent mRNA vaccine was 43% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17, 61%). In subgroup analysis based on age and underlying medical conditions, BA.4/BA.5-based bivalent mRNA vaccine was effective against old adults aged ≥ 65-years (VE, 55%; 95% CI, 23, 73%) and individuals with comorbidities (VE, 54%; 95% CI, 23, 73%). In comparison, the BA.1-based bivalent mRNA vaccine did not demonstrate statistically significant effectiveness (VE, 25%; 95% CI, −8, 49%). @*Conclusion@#The BA.4/BA.5-based bivalent mRNA booster vaccine provided significant protection against COVID-19 in the Korean adults, especially in the older adults aged ≥ 65 years and in individuals with underlying medical conditions.
RESUMEN
In May 2023, the Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association published the revised clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes. We incorporated the latest clinical research findings through a comprehensive systematic literature review and applied them in a manner suitable for the Korean population. These guidelines are designed for all healthcare providers nationwide, including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators who manage patients with diabetes or individuals at risk of developing diabetes. Based on recent changes in international guidelines and the results of a Korean epidemiological study, the recommended age for diabetes screening has been lowered. In collaboration with the relevant Korean medical societies, recently revised guidelines for managing hypertension and dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes have been incorporated into this guideline. An abridgment containing practical information on patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.
RESUMEN
Background@#Targeted risk population has been highly vaccinated against pneumococcal diseases in South Korea. Despite this, the pneumococcal serotype distribution is evolving, which impedes efficient roll-out of vaccines. @*Methods@#This prospective cohort study included patients aged ≥ 19 years with communityacquired pneumonia (CAP) from five university hospitals in South Korea between September 2018 and July 2021. The outcomes of interest were the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with CAP, pneumococcal serotype distribution, and risk factors of 30-day mortality in patients with pneumococcal CAP (pCAP). Considering the high seroprevalence, we analyzed the clinical characteristics of serotype 3 pCAP. @*Results@#A total of 5,009 patients hospitalized with CAP was included (mean age ± standard deviation, 70.3 ± 16.0 years; 3,159 [63.1%] men). Streptococcus pneumoniae was the leading causative agent of CAP (11.8% overall, 17.7% in individuals aged < 65 years with chronic medical conditions). Among the 280 serotyped Streptococcus pneumococcus, serotype 3 was the most common (10.0%), followed by serotypes 19A (8.9%), 34 (8.9%), and 35B (8.9%).Non-vaccine serotypes (serotype 35B [13.9%] and 34 [12.0%]) were the most prevalent in 108 individuals vaccinated with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23).Serotype 3 was prevalent, irrespective of PPSV23 vaccination status, and more common in individuals with chronic lung disease (P = 0.008). Advanced age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.040; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.011–1.071), long-term care facility residence (aOR, 2.161; 95% CI, 1.071–4.357), and bacteremia (aOR, 4.193; 95% CI, 1.604–10.962) were independent risk factors for 30-day mortality in patients with pCAP. PPSV23 vaccination reduced the risk of mortality (aOR, 0.507; 95% CI, 0.267–0.961). @*Conclusion@#Serotype 3 and 19A were still the most common serotypes of pCAP in South Korea despite the national immunization program of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugated vaccine in children and PPSV23 in old adults. PPSV23 vaccination might reduce the risk of mortality in patients with pCAP.
RESUMEN
As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic remains uncontrolled owing to the continuous emergence of variants of concern, there is an immediate need to implement the most effective antiviral treatment strategies, especially for risk groups. Here, we evaluated the therapeutic potency of nirmatrelvir, remdesivir, and molnupiravir and their combinations in SARS-CoV-2-infected K18-hACE2 transgenic mice. Systemic treatment of mice with each drug (20 mg/kg) resulted in slightly enhanced antiviral efficacy and yielded an increased life expectancy of only about 20-40% survival. However, combination therapy with nirmatrelvir (20 mg/kg) and molnupiravir (20 mg/kg) in lethally infected mice showed profound inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication in both the lung and brain and synergistically improved survival times up to 80% compared to those with nirmatrelvir (P= 0.0001) and molnupiravir (P= 0.0001) administered alone. This combination therapy effectively reduced clinical severity score, virus-induced tissue damage, and viral distribution compared to those in animals treated with these monotherapies. Furthermore, all these assessments associated with this combination were also significantly higher than that of mice receiving remdesivir monotherapy (P= 0.0001) and the nirmatrelvir (20 mg/kg) and remdesivir (20 mg/kg) combination (P= 0.0001), underscored the clinical significance of this combination. By contrast, the nirmatrelvir and remdesivir combination showed less antiviral efficacy, with lower survival compared to nirmatrelvir monotherapy, demonstrating the inefficient therapeutic effect of this combination. The combination therapy with nirmatrelvir and molnupiravir contributes to alleviated morbidity and mortality, which can serve as a basis for the design of clinical studies of this combination in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. IMPORTANCESince SARS-CoV-2 spread rapidly with the emergence of new variants of concerns, it is necessary to develop effective treatment strategies to treat elderly individuals and those with comorbidities. Antiviral therapy using a combination of drugs is more effective in eradicating viruses and will undoubtedly improve the clinical outcome and survival probability of hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients. In the current study, we observed three FDA-approved antivirals nirmatrelvir, remdesivir, and molnupiravir have therapeutic significance with moderate survival for their monotherapies against SARS-CoV-2 infected K18-hACE2 mouse model. The combination of nirmatrelvir and molnupiravir showed significant antiviral activity and a higher survival rate of approximately 80%, providing in vivo evidence of the potential utility of this combination. In contrast, nirmatrelvir and remdesivir combination showed less antiviral potency and emphasized the ineffective significance with less survival. The current study suggests that the nirmatrelvir and molnupiravir combination is an effective drug regimen strategy in treating SARS-CoV-2 patients.
RESUMEN
BackgroundVaccination has helped to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. Ten traditional and novel vaccines have been listed by the World Health Organization for emergency use. Additional alternative approaches may better address ongoing vaccination globally, where there remains an inequity in vaccine distribution. GBP510 is a recombinant protein vaccine, which consists of self-assembling, two-component nanoparticles displaying the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in a highly immunogenic array. MethodsWe conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, phase 1/2 trial to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of GBP510 (2-doses at a 28-day interval) adjuvanted with or without AS03 in adults aged 19-85 years. The main outcomes included solicited and unsolicited adverse events; anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG antibody and neutralizing antibody responses; T-cell immune responses. FindingsOf 328 participants who underwent randomization, 327 participants received at least 1 dose of vaccine. Each received either 10 g GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 (n = 101), 10 g unadjuvanted GBP510 (n = 10), 25 g GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 (n = 104), 25 g unadjuvanted GBP510 (n = 51), or placebo (n = 61). Most solicited adverse events were mild-to-moderate in severity and transient. Higher reactogenicity was observed in the GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 groups compared to the non-adjuvanted and placebo groups. Reactogenicity was higher post-dose 2 compared to post-dose 1, particularly for systemic adverse events. The geometric mean concentrations of anti-SARS-CoV-2-RBD IgG antibody reached 2163.6/2599.2 BAU/mL in GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 recipients (10 g/25 g) by 14 days after the second dose. Two-dose vaccination with 10 g or 25 g GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 induced high titers of neutralizing antibody via pseudovirus (1369.0/1431.5 IU/mL) and wild-type virus (949.8/861.0 IU/mL) assays. InterpretationGBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 was well tolerated and highly immunogenic. These results support further development of the vaccine candidate, which is currently being evaluated in Phase 3. FundingCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for research articles published by December 31, 2021, using the terms "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2," "vaccine," and "clinical trial." In previously reported randomized clinical trials, we found that mRNA vaccines were more immunogenic than adenovirus-vectored vaccines. Solicited adverse events were more frequent and more severe in intensity after the first dose compared to the second dose for adenovirus-vectored vaccines, whereas they increased after the second dose of mRNA or recombinant spike-protein nanoparticle vaccines. Added value of this studyThis is the first human study evaluating the immunogenicity and safety of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 protein nanoparticle with and without adjuvant AS03, designed to elicit functional cross-protective responses via receptor-binding domain (RBD). Both 10 and 25 g of GBP510 with AS03 formulations were well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. Potent humoral immune responses against the SARS-CoV-2 RBD were induced and peaked by day 42 (14 days after the second dose). In addition, GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 elicited a noticeable Th1 response, with production of IFN-{gamma}, TNF-, and IL-2. IL-4 was inconsistent and IL-5 nearly inexistent response across all groups. Implications of the available evidenceThe results from this phase 1/2 trial indicate that GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 has an acceptable safety profile with no vaccine-related serious adverse events. Two-dose immunization with GBP510 adjuvanted with AS03 induced potent humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2.
RESUMEN
Background@#Although several characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an ongoing pandemic disease, have been identified, data on the infectivity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are limited. @*Methods@#This prospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the infectivity of SARSCoV-2 based on data of all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 confirmed using real-time polymerase chain reaction test from January to April 2020 in Gyeonggi-do, the largest province in Korea. @*Results@#Of the 502 patients, 298 consisting of 106 clusters with 5,909 contacts were included. Of these, 277 (93.0%) were symptomatic, and the most common symptoms were cough, fever, sputum, sore throat, and headache. A total of 94 patients (31.5%) had pneumonia, while 8 (2.7%) died during the follow-up period. The secondary attack rate (SAR) in the study population was 3.5% (204/5,909). In exposure settings, the SAR was higher in religious gathering (13.5% [95% confidence interval, 10.7–16.8%]), workplaces (8.49% [95% CI, 6.08–11.74%]), and schools (6.38% [95% CI, 3.39–11.69%]) than in health care facilities (1.92% [95% CI, 1.45–2.55%]). Sore throat at any period, dyspnea at diagnosis or any period, lower cycle threshold value in the lower respiratory tract samples, leukocytosis, and higher bilirubin levels were associated with higher infectivity of COVID-19. The presence of symptoms was not related to the infectivity. @*Conclusion@#In establishing the infection control strategies for COVID-19, the variables associated with high infectivity may be considered.
RESUMEN
BackgroundClevudine, an antiviral drug for chronic hepatitis B virus infection, is expected to inhibit the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, single-blind, proof of concept clinical study to examine the antiviral efficacy and safety of clevudine compared to placebo in Korean corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients with moderate severity. MethodsAdults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptom onset within 7 days were randomized 2:1 to 120 mg clevudine or placebo to receive one of treatments orally once-daily for 14 days. Antiviral efficacy outcomes were the proportion of patients with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negative result for SARS-CoV-2 infection and cycle threshold (Ct) value changes from baseline. Clinical efficacy outcomes included proportion of patients who showed improvement in lung involvement by imaging tests, proportion of patients with normal body temperature, proportion of patients with normal oxygen saturation, and the changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) from baseline. Safety outcomes included changes in clinical laboratory tests, vital signs measurement, and physical examination from baseline, and incidence of adverse events. ResultsThe proportion of patients with real-time RT-PCR negative test and Ct value changes showed no significant difference between clevudine group and placebo group. The changes in Ct value from baseline were significantly greater in clevudine group compared to placebo group in patients with hypertension, and patients who underwent randomization during the first 5 and 7 days after the onset of symptoms. All clinical efficacy outcomes had no significant difference between clevudine group and placebo group. Clevudine was well tolerated and there was no significant difference in safety profile between two treatment groups. ConclusionsThis is the first clinical study to compare the antiviral efficacy and safety of clevudine to placebo in Korean COVID-19 patients with moderate severity. The study has demonstrated a possible favorable outcome for the reduction of SARS-CoV-2 replication, with acceptable safety profile, when COVID-19 patients were treated with clevudine. Further large-scale clinical studies, preferably with various clinical endpoints and virus titer evaluation, are required to better understand the effectiveness of using clevudine in COVID-19 treatment. Considering recent trend in clinical development for antiviral drugs, we need to design a clinical study aiming for reducing clinical risk of COVID-19 in mild to moderate patients with at least one risk factor for serious illness.
RESUMEN
Memory T cells contribute to rapid viral clearance during re-infection, but the longevity and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells remain unclear. We conducted direct ex vivo assays to evaluate SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in COVID-19 convalescents up to 254 days post-symptom onset (DPSO). Here, we report that memory T cell responses were maintained during the study period. In particular, we observed sustained polyfunctionality and proliferation capacity of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. Among SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells detected by activation-induced markers, the proportion of stem cell-like memory T (TSCM) cells increased, peaking at approximately 120 DPSO. Development of TSCM cells was confirmed by SARS-CoV-2-specific MHC-I multimer staining. Considering the self-renewal capacity and multipotency of TSCM cells, our data suggest that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are long-lasting after recovery from COVID-19. The current study provides insight for establishing an effective vaccination program and epidemiological measurement.
RESUMEN
Hospital-based surveillance for adverse events was conducted on healthcare workers after they received the first dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. Among the two new platform vaccines (messenger RNA- and adenoviral vector-based vaccines), the rates of systemic adverse events were significantly higher among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients. Fatigue (87.6% vs. 53.8%), myalgia (80.8% vs. 50.0%), headache (72.0% vs.28.8%), and fever (≥ 38.0°C, 38.7% vs. 0%) were the most common adverse events among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients, but most symptoms resolved within 2 days. Both types of COVID-19 vaccines were generally safe, and serious adverse events rarely occurred.
RESUMEN
Background@#The aim of this study was to evaluate the subjective and objective olfactory function in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and the effect of olfactory training. @*Methods@#A prospective cohort study was performed in 53 patients who recovered from COVID-19 and visited our tertiary hospital. Subjective olfactory function was evaluated using the 11-point Likert scale (0–10) and the Korean version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QOD). Objective olfactory function was evaluated using Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test (CC-SIT). Confirmed patients were followed up after 2 months of olfactory training. @*Results@#The median, interquartile range (Q1–Q3) score of subjective olfactory function significantly deteriorated in patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) than in those without OD, even after 3 months of onset (11-point Likert scale, 8, 6–9 vs. 10, 10–10; short version of QOD-negative statements, 19, 16–21 vs. 21, 21–21; QOD-visual analogue scale, 7, 1–13 vs. 0, 0–0; all P < 0.001). However, the objective olfactory function was not significantly different between the two groups (median, interquartile range; 11, 9–11 vs. 11, 9–11, P = 0.887). The percentage of patients with objective hyposmia (CC-SIT ≤ 10) was also not significantly different (47.4% vs. 40%,P = 0.762). OD in COVID-19 was normalized after 2 months of olfactory training in 70% of patients even after 3 months of olfactory impairment. @*Conclusion@#Although subjective olfactory function is significantly decreased in the OD group, the objective olfactory function was not significantly different. Moreover, olfactory training is effective in COVID-19 patients with OD.
RESUMEN
Background@#This study presents a framework for determining the allocation and distribution of the limited amount of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). @*Methods@#After analyzing the pandemic strategies of the major organizations and countries and with a literature review conducted by a core panel, a modified Delphi survey was administered to 13 experts in the fields of vaccination, infectious disease, and public health in the Republic of Korea. The following topics were discussed: 1) identifying the objectives of the vaccination strategy, 2) identifying allocation criteria, and 3) establishing a step-bystep vaccination framework and prioritization strategy based on the allocation criteria. Two rounds of surveys were conducted for each topic, with a structured questionnaire provided via e-mail in the first round. After analyzing the responses, a meeting with the experts was held to obtain consensus on how to prioritize the population groups. @*Results@#The first objective of the vaccination strategy was maintenance of the integrity of the healthcare system and critical infrastructure, followed by reduction of morbidity and mortality and reduction of community transmission. In the initial phase, older adult residents in care homes, high-risk health and social care workers, and personal support workers who work in direct contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients would be prioritized. Expansion of vaccine supply would allow immunization of older adults not included in phase 1, followed by healthcare workers not previously included and individuals with comorbidities. Further widespread vaccine supply would ensure availability to the extended adult age groups (50–64 years old), critical workers outside the health sector, residents who cannot socially distance, and, eventually, the remaining populations. @*Conclusion@#This survey provides the much needed insight into the decision-making process for vaccine allocation at the national level. However, flexibility in adapting to strategies will be essential, as new information is constantly emerging.
RESUMEN
Hospital-based surveillance for adverse events was conducted on healthcare workers after they received the first dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. Among the two new platform vaccines (messenger RNA- and adenoviral vector-based vaccines), the rates of systemic adverse events were significantly higher among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients. Fatigue (87.6% vs. 53.8%), myalgia (80.8% vs. 50.0%), headache (72.0% vs.28.8%), and fever (≥ 38.0°C, 38.7% vs. 0%) were the most common adverse events among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients, but most symptoms resolved within 2 days. Both types of COVID-19 vaccines were generally safe, and serious adverse events rarely occurred.
RESUMEN
Background@#The aim of this study was to evaluate the subjective and objective olfactory function in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and the effect of olfactory training. @*Methods@#A prospective cohort study was performed in 53 patients who recovered from COVID-19 and visited our tertiary hospital. Subjective olfactory function was evaluated using the 11-point Likert scale (0–10) and the Korean version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QOD). Objective olfactory function was evaluated using Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test (CC-SIT). Confirmed patients were followed up after 2 months of olfactory training. @*Results@#The median, interquartile range (Q1–Q3) score of subjective olfactory function significantly deteriorated in patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) than in those without OD, even after 3 months of onset (11-point Likert scale, 8, 6–9 vs. 10, 10–10; short version of QOD-negative statements, 19, 16–21 vs. 21, 21–21; QOD-visual analogue scale, 7, 1–13 vs. 0, 0–0; all P < 0.001). However, the objective olfactory function was not significantly different between the two groups (median, interquartile range; 11, 9–11 vs. 11, 9–11, P = 0.887). The percentage of patients with objective hyposmia (CC-SIT ≤ 10) was also not significantly different (47.4% vs. 40%,P = 0.762). OD in COVID-19 was normalized after 2 months of olfactory training in 70% of patients even after 3 months of olfactory impairment. @*Conclusion@#Although subjective olfactory function is significantly decreased in the OD group, the objective olfactory function was not significantly different. Moreover, olfactory training is effective in COVID-19 patients with OD.
RESUMEN
Background@#This study presents a framework for determining the allocation and distribution of the limited amount of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). @*Methods@#After analyzing the pandemic strategies of the major organizations and countries and with a literature review conducted by a core panel, a modified Delphi survey was administered to 13 experts in the fields of vaccination, infectious disease, and public health in the Republic of Korea. The following topics were discussed: 1) identifying the objectives of the vaccination strategy, 2) identifying allocation criteria, and 3) establishing a step-bystep vaccination framework and prioritization strategy based on the allocation criteria. Two rounds of surveys were conducted for each topic, with a structured questionnaire provided via e-mail in the first round. After analyzing the responses, a meeting with the experts was held to obtain consensus on how to prioritize the population groups. @*Results@#The first objective of the vaccination strategy was maintenance of the integrity of the healthcare system and critical infrastructure, followed by reduction of morbidity and mortality and reduction of community transmission. In the initial phase, older adult residents in care homes, high-risk health and social care workers, and personal support workers who work in direct contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients would be prioritized. Expansion of vaccine supply would allow immunization of older adults not included in phase 1, followed by healthcare workers not previously included and individuals with comorbidities. Further widespread vaccine supply would ensure availability to the extended adult age groups (50–64 years old), critical workers outside the health sector, residents who cannot socially distance, and, eventually, the remaining populations. @*Conclusion@#This survey provides the much needed insight into the decision-making process for vaccine allocation at the national level. However, flexibility in adapting to strategies will be essential, as new information is constantly emerging.
RESUMEN
Neutralizing antibodies targeted at the receptor-binding domain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein have been developed and now under evaluation in clinical trials. The US Food and Drug Administration currently issued emergency use authorizations for neutralizing monoclonal antibodies in non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease and/or hospitalization. In terms of this situation, there is an urgent need to investigate the clinical aspects and to develop strategies to deploy them effectively in clinical practice. Here we provide guidance for the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.
RESUMEN
Despite the global effort to mitigate the spread, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic that took more than 2 million lives. There are numerous ongoing clinical studies aiming to find treatment options and many are being published daily. Some effective treatment options, albeit of variable efficacy, have been discovered. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an evidence-based methodology, to continuously check for new evidence, and to update recommendations accordingly. Here we provide guidelines on pharmaceutical treatment for COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.
RESUMEN
Neutralizing antibodies targeted at the receptor-binding domain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein have been developed and now under evaluation in clinical trials. The US Food and Drug Administration currently issued emergency use authorizations for neutralizing monoclonal antibodies in non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease and/or hospitalization. In terms of this situation, there is an urgent need to investigate the clinical aspects and to develop strategies to deploy them effectively in clinical practice. Here we provide guidance for the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.
RESUMEN
Despite the global effort to mitigate the spread, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic that took more than 2 million lives. There are numerous ongoing clinical studies aiming to find treatment options and many are being published daily. Some effective treatment options, albeit of variable efficacy, have been discovered. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an evidence-based methodology, to continuously check for new evidence, and to update recommendations accordingly. Here we provide guidelines on pharmaceutical treatment for COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.
