Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet Glob Health ; 12(4): e589-e598, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38485426

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Typhoid is a serious public health threat in many low-income and middle-income countries. Several vaccines for typhoid have been recommended by WHO for typhoid prevention in endemic countries. This study aimed to review the efficacy of typhoid vaccines against culture-confirmed Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for studies published in English between Jan 1, 1986 and Nov 2, 2023. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing typhoid vaccines with a placebo or another vaccine. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of several typhoid vaccines, including live attenuated oral Ty21a vaccine, Vi capsular polysaccharide (Vi-PS), Vi polysaccharide conjugated to recombinant Pseudomonas aeruginosa exotoxin A vaccine (Vi-rEPA), and Vi-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine (TCV). The certainty of evidence for key outcomes was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology. The outcome of interest was typhoid fever confirmed by the isolation of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi in blood and adverse events following immunisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021241043). FINDINGS: We included 14 RCTs assessing four different vaccines (Ty21a: four trials; Vi-PS: five trials; Vi-rEPA: one trial; TCV: four trials) involving 585 253 participants. All trials were conducted in typhoid endemic countries and the age of participants ranged from 6 months to 50 years. The pooled efficacy against typhoid fever was 45% (95% CI 33-55%; four trials; 247 649 participants; I2 59%; moderate certainty) for Ty21a and 58% (44-69%; five trials; 214 456 participants; I2 34%; moderate certainty) for polysaccharide Vi-PS. The cumulative efficacy of two doses of Vi-rEPA vaccine at 2 years was 91% (88-96%; one trial; 12 008 participants; moderate certainty). The pooled efficacy of a single shot of TCV at 2 years post-immunisation was 83% (77-87%; four trials; 111 130 participants; I2 0%; moderate certainty). All vaccines were safe, with no serious adverse effects reported in the trials. INTERPRETATION: The existing data from included trials provide promising results regarding the efficacy and safety of the four recommended typhoid vaccines. TCV and Vi-rEPA were found to have the highest efficacy at 2 years post-immunisation. However, follow-up data for Vi-rEPA are scarce and only TCV is pre-qualified by WHO. Therefore, roll-out of TCV into routine immunisation programmes in typhoid endemic settings is highly recommended. FUNDING: There was no funding source for this study.


Assuntos
Febre Tifoide , Vacinas Tíficas-Paratíficas , Humanos , Lactente , Salmonella typhi , Febre Tifoide/epidemiologia , Febre Tifoide/prevenção & controle , Exotoxina A de Pseudomonas aeruginosa , Vacinas Atenuadas , Vacinas Conjugadas , Toxoide Tetânico , Polissacarídeos
2.
Int J Cancer ; 154(8): 1394-1412, 2024 Apr 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38083979

RESUMO

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste para COVID-19 , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...