Statin use and medically attended acute respiratory illness among influenza vaccine recipients

BackgroundPrevious studies have suggested that statins decrease influenza vaccine effectiveness and increase risk of medically attended acute respiratory illness (MAARI).ObjectivesTo examine the association of incident statin use and MAARI in a cohort of influenza vaccine recipients.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated influenza vaccine recipients within the Tricare population. The primary outcome compared MAARI incidence during the follow-up period in a propensity score-matched cohort of incident statin users and statin non-users. Secondary analysis included propensity score-adjusted comparisons between incident statin users and statin non-users in the entire cohort and prespecified sub-cohorts with and without comorbidities. The propensity score was derived from 72 variables encompassing demographics, medical history, comorbidities, medication use, and healthcare utilization.ResultsMAARI incidence in statin users was similar to non-users in the propensity score-matched cohort (odds ratio [OR] 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–1.01). In contrast, statin users with lower comorbidity had lower OR for MAARI compared to non-users (Charlson Score zero cohort: 0.85 [CI 0.74–0.98]; No Diabetes cohort: 0.88 [CI 0.80–0.96]).ConclusionIncident statin use was not associated with increased MAARI incidence and may be associated with lower incidence of MAARI in those with less comorbidity. This study thus offers reassurance regarding the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in statin users.     

Status of vaccine research and development for Helicobacter pylori

Gastric adenocarcinoma is globally the third leading cause of death due to malignancy, with the bulk of this disease burden being suffered by low and middle income countries (LMIC), especially in Asia. The majority of these cancers develop as a result of a chronic gastritis that arises in response to infection with the stomach-dwelling bacterium, Helicobacter pylori. A vaccine against this pathogen would therefore be a powerful tool for preventing gastric adenocarcinoma. However, notwithstanding a proof-of-concept that vaccination can protect children from acquisition of H. pylori infection, there are currently no advanced vaccine candidates with only a single vaccine in Phase I clinical trial. Further, the development of a vaccine against H. pylori is not a current strategic priority of major pharmaceutical companies despite the large global disease burden. Given the involvement of such companies is likely to be critical for late stage development, there is therefore a need for an increased appreciation of the burden of this disease in LMIC and more investment to reinvigorate research in H. pylori vaccine Research and Development.     

Research priorities for accelerating progress toward measles and rubella elimination identified by a cross-sectional web-based survey

BackgroundIn 2012, the World Health Assembly endorsed the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) that set a target to eliminate measles and rubella in five of the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions by 2020. Significant progress has been made toward achieving this goal through intensive efforts by countries and Measles & Rubella Initiative (M&RI) partners. Accelerating progress will require evidence-based approaches to improve implementation of the core strategies in the Global Measles and Rubella Strategic Plan. The M&RI Research and Innovation Working Group (R&IWG) conducted a web-based survey as part of a process to identify measles and rubella research priorities. Survey findings were used to inform discussions during a meeting of experts convened by the M&RI at the Pan American Health Organization in November 2016.MethodsThe cross-sectional web-based survey of scientific and programmatic experts included questions in four main topic areas: (1) epidemiology and economics (epidemiology); (2) new tools for surveillance, vaccine delivery, and laboratory testing (new tools); (3) immunization strategies and outbreak response (strategies); and (4) vaccine demand and communications (demand). Analyses were stratified by the six WHO regions and by global, regional, or national/sub-national level of respondents.ResultsThe six highest priority research questions selected by survey respondents from the four topic areas were the following: (1) What are the causes of outbreaks in settings with high reported vaccination coverage? (epidemiology); (2) Can affordable diagnostic tests be developed to confirm measles and rubella cases rapidly and accurately at the point of care? (new tools); (3) What are effective strategies for increasing coverage of the routine first dose of measles vaccine administered at 9 or 12 months? (strategies); (4) What are effective strategies for increasing coverage of the second dose given after the first year of life? (strategies); (5) How can communities best be engaged in planning, implementing and monitoring health services including vaccinations? (demand); (6) What capacity building is needed for health workers to be able to identify and work more effectively with community leaders? (demand). Research priorities varied by region and by global/regional/national levels for all topic areas.ConclusionsResearch and innovation will be critical to make further progress toward achieving the GVAP measles and rubella elimination goals. The results of this survey can be used to inform decision-making for investments in research activities at the global, regional, and national levels.     

Measuring Discomfort in Health Research Relative to Everyday Events and Routine Care: An Application to Sexual and Gender Minority Youth

Purpose

Understanding how sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth's comfort with research procedures compares to their comfort with everyday experiences and routine health care can help calibrate decisions about whether a study meets minimal risk criteria. We sought to quantify SGM adolescents' comfort with sexual health research relative to everyday events and activities often cited as benchmarks of minimal risk.

Trends in advanced imaging and hospitalization for emergency department syncope care before and after ACEP clinical policy

ObjectivesTo describe recent trends in advanced imaging and hospitalization of emergency department (ED) syncope patients, both considered “low-value”, and examine trend changes before and after the publication of American College Emergency Physician (ACEP) syncope guidelines in 2007, compared to conditions that had no changes in guideline recommendations.MethodsWe analyzed 2002–2015 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data using an interrupted-time series with comparison series design. The primary outcomes were advanced imaging among ED visits with principal diagnosis of syncope and headache and hospitalization for ED visits with principal diagnosis of syncope, chest pain, dysrhythmia, and pneumonia. We adjusted annual imaging and hospitalization rates using survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression, controlling for demographic and visit characteristics. Using adjusted outcomes as datapoints, we compared linear trends and trend changes of annual imaging and hospitalization rates before and after 2007 with aggregate-level multivariable linear regression.ResultsFrom 2002 to 2007, advanced imaging rates for syncope increased from 27.2% to 42.1% but had no significant trend after 2007 (trend change: ?3.1%; 95%CI ?4.7, ?1.6). Hospitalization rates remained at approximately 37% from 2002 to 2007 but declined to 25.7% by 2015 (trend change: ?2.2%; 95%CI ?3.0, ?1.4). Similar trend changes occurred among control conditions versus syncope, including advanced imaging for headache (difference in trend change: ?0.6%; 95%CI ?2.8, 1.6) and hospitalizations for chest pain, dysrhythmia, and pneumonia (differences in trend changes: 0.1% [95%CI ?1.9, 2.0]; ?0.9% [95%CI ?3.1, 1.3]; and ?1.2% [95%CI ?5.3, 2.9], respectively).ConclusionsBefore and after the release of 2007 ACEP syncope guidelines, trends in advanced imaging and hospitalization for ED syncope visits had similar changes compared to control conditions. Changes in syncope care may, therefore, reflect broader practice shifts rather than a direct association with the 2007 ACEP guideline. Moreover, utilization of advanced imaging remains prevalent. To reduce low-value care, policymakers should augment society guidelines with additional policy changes such as reportable quality measures.