不同年龄阿尔茨海默病患者脑核团ADC值与年龄的相关性

目的 探讨不同年龄阿尔茨海默病（AD）患者ADC值与年龄的相关性。方法 选取30例AD患者（AD组）和年龄与之相匹配的30名志愿者（对照组），按年龄段各分为6个亚组[55~59岁（n=3）、60~64岁（n=4）、65~70岁（n=9）、71~74岁（n=5）、75~80岁（n=6）、>80岁（n=3）]，测量双侧海马、红核、尾状核、杏仁体、壳核ADC值，并进行配对t检验、独立样本t检验、单因素方差分析及Pearson相关分析。结果 AD组红核左、右侧ADC值有统计学差异（P=0.022）。AD组不同年龄亚组右侧海马、双侧尾状核、右侧壳核ADC值差异有统计学意义（P均<0.05）；2组不同年龄亚组双侧海马、壳核、尾状核ADC值差异有统计学意义（P均<0.05）。AD组右侧海马（r=0.615，P<0.001）、右侧壳核（r=0.653，P=0.001）及双侧尾状核（左侧：r=0.397，P=0.030；右侧：r=0.429，P=0.020）ADC值与年龄呈正相关。结论 AD患者右侧海马和壳核、双侧尾状核ADC值随年龄增加而增大。ADC值可为临床预测和早期诊断AD脑内右侧海马和壳核、双侧尾状核神经退行性病变提供参考。     

Antibody persistence and booster response following MenACWY-CRM vaccination in children as assessed by two different assay methods

BackgroundThe quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine MenACWY-CRM has been shown to be immunogenic and well-tolerated in infants and toddlers. We evaluated antibody persistence for up to 4 years after vaccination with MenACWY-CRM in the first years of life and response to a booster dose administered at 60 months of age.MethodsThis was phase 3b, open-label, multicenter extension trial (NCT01148017). We assessed by hSBA and rSBA the persistence of antibody responses to serogroups ACWY in 203 healthy 60-month-olds receiving 4 doses of MenACWY-CRM during infancy (ACWY-4 group), or 2 doses at 12/13 and 15 months or 1 dose at 18 months of age (ACWY-2 group). We administered a MenACWY-CRM dose to 224 primed and 45 naïve 60-month-olds and evaluated safety and antibody response 1 month later.ResultsAntibody persistence measured by both assays was higher in primed than naïve 60-month-olds. The percentages of primed children with hSBA titers ≥8 was low for serogroup A (6–25%) and moderate for serogroups C (27–43%), Y (69–74%) and W (56–69%). For all serogroups, hSBA antibody geometric mean titers (GMTs) tended to be higher in the ACWY-2 than the ACWY-4 group. Post-booster/single dose, ≥96% of primed and ≥73% of naïve children had hSBA titers ≥8 against each serogroup, and hSBA GMTs were higher in primed children. The booster dose was well-tolerated and no safety concern was identified. We further assessed persistence using rSBA across different age groups and detected no overall correlation between rSBA and hSBA titers.ConclusionsPrimary vaccination of infants/toddlers with MenACWY-CRM resulted in moderate antibody persistence against serogroups C, W and Y for up to 4 years after the last priming dose. Regardless of priming schedule, a MenACWY-CRM booster dose at 60 months of age induced a robust immune response against all serogroups and was well-tolerated in all children.     

Comparison between a new multiplex electrochemiluminescence assay and the WHO reference enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to measure serum antibodies against pneumococcal serotype-specific polysaccharides

Background

Two electrochemiluminescence (ECL) assays were developed which, together, can simultaneously measure serum antibodies against pneumococcal capsular polysaccharides (PnPS) for 17 serotypes. The assays were validated for the 13 PnPS included in the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). As recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), we compared the ECL assays with the WHO reference enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and derived a threshold corresponding to the 0.35?µg/mL threshold established for the WHO reference ELISA for the non-inferiority comparison and licensure of new PCVs against invasive pneumococcal disease.

Healthcare workers’ knowledge,beliefs, and coverage regarding vaccinations in critical care units in Italy

BackgroundLow rates of vaccine coverage have resulted in a resurgence of several vaccine-preventable diseases in many European countries. Routine vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) is important to reduce disease transmission, and to promote vaccine awareness and acceptance in the population. The objectives of this cross-sectional study were to investigate knowledge and beliefs about vaccines and to evaluate self-reported immunization coverage with vaccines recommended for HCWs. Additionally, the effects of several factors on these outcomes have been evaluated.MethodsA survey was conducted between September and November 2018 among a random sample of HCWs in cardiac, adult, and neonatal critical care units of 8 randomly selected hospitals across the Campania and Calabria Regions in Italy. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis has been performed.ResultsA total 531 HCWs returned the questionnaire for a response rate of 54.9%. Based on a vaccination knowledge score ranging from 0 to 9, more than half of the participants (55.4%) knew few of the vaccines recommended for HCWs (≤3 correct answers), 16.2% knew some vaccines (4–6 correct answers), and 28.4% knew most vaccines (≥7 correct answers), and only 13.2% knew all the vaccines recommended for HCWs. However, two-thirds (62.2%) knew that hepatitis B and influenza vaccines were recommended, and this knowledge was significantly higher among females (p < 0.001), among HCWs aged between 50 and 59 years (p = 0.01) compared with those aged < 30 years, and in those who search for information about recommended vaccines for HCWs (p = 0.012). The vaccine knowledge was significantly lower among nurses and nursing supporting staff compared with physicians (p = 0.032). Approximately two-thirds (62.7%) of HCWs considered themselves at risk of contracting vaccine-preventable infectious diseases during their professional practice. High rates of coverage were self-reported for hepatitis B (96.3%), tetanus and pertussis (93.7%), whereas they were lower for measles/mumps/rubella (80.5%), chickenpox (65.3%), and influenza (35.8%). Only 9.2% of HCWs reported prior receipt of all recommended vaccines. Male HCWs were less likely to report prior receipt of all recommended vaccines (p = 0.011). HCWs aged between 30 and 39 years compared with those aged < 30 years (p = 0.001) and those who knew some (p < 0.001) and most (p = 0.007) of all vaccines recommended for HCWs were more likely to self-report to be immunized.ConclusionsAdditional training about the vaccinations is needed to improve HCWs knowledge and to address specific concerns which may lead to better uptake among this group.     

Lifetime costs of invasive meningococcal disease: A Markov model approach

IntroductionInvasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is an uncommon but life-threatening infectious disease associated with high sequelae rates in young children and an increased risk of mortality in adolescents and young adults. Funding decisions to reject inclusion of new meningococcal serogroup B vaccines on national immunisation schedules have been criticised by IMD patients, their families, paediatricians and charity organisations. We aim to estimate the lifetime costs of IMD with the best available evidence to inform cost-effectiveness analyses.MethodsA Markov model was developed taking healthcare system and societal perspectives. A range of data including age-specific mortality rates, and probabilities of IMD-related sequelae were derived from a systematic review and meta-analysis. All currencies were inflated to year 2017 prices by using consumer price indexes in local countries and converted to US dollars by applying purchasing power parities conversion rates. Expert panels were used to inform the model development process including key structural choices and model validations.ResultsThe estimated lifetime societal cost is US$319,896.74 per IMD case including the direct healthcare cost of US$65,035.49. Using a discount rate of 5%, the costs are US$54,278.51 and US$13,968.40 respectively. Chronic renal failure and limb amputation result in the highest direct healthcare costs per patient. Patients aged < 5 years incur the higher healthcare expenditure compared with other age groups. The costing results are sensitive to the discount rate, disease incidence, acute admission costs, and sequelae rates and costs of brain injuries and epilepsy.ConclusionsIMD can result in substantial costs to the healthcare system and society. Understanding the costs of care can assist decision-making bodies in evaluating cost-effectiveness of new vaccine programs.     

The Global Vaccine Action Plan – insights into its utility,application, and ways to strengthen future plans

BackgroundThe pace of global progress must increase if the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) goals are to be achieved by 2020. We administered a two-phase survey to key immunization stakeholders to assess the utility and application of GVAP, including how it has impacted country immunization programs, and to find ways to strengthen the next 10-year plan.MethodsFor the Phase I survey, an online questionnaire was sent to global immunization stakeholders in summer 2017. The Phase II survey was sent to regional and national immunization stakeholders in summer 2018, including WHO Regional Advisors on Immunization, Expanded Programme on Immunization managers, and WHO and UNICEF country representatives from 20 countries. Countries were selected based on improvements (10) versus decreases (10) in DTP3 coverage from 2010 to 2016.ResultsGlobal immunization stakeholders (n = 38) cite global progress in improving vaccine delivery (88%) and engaging civil society organizations as advocates for vaccines (83%). Among regional and national immunization stakeholders (n = 58), 70% indicated reaching mobile and underserved populations with vaccination activities as a major challenge. The top ranked activities for helping country programs achieve progress toward GVAP goals include improved monitoring of vaccination coverage and upgrading disease surveillance systems. Most respondents (96%) indicated GVAP as useful for determining immunization priorities and 95% were supportive of a post-2020 GVAP strategy.ConclusionsImmunization stakeholders see GVAP as a useful tool, and there is cause for excitement as the global immunization community looks toward the next decade of vaccines. The next 10-year plan should attempt to increase political will, align immunization activities with other health system agendas, and address important issues like reaching mobile/migrant populations and improving data reporting systems.     

Adjuvant Systems for vaccines: 13 years of post-licensure experience in diverse populations have progressed the way adjuvanted vaccine safety is investigated and understood

Adjuvant Systems (AS) are combinations of immune stimulants that enhance the immune response to vaccine antigens. The first vaccine containing an AS (AS04) was licensed in 2005. As of 2018, several vaccines containing AS04, AS03 or AS01 have been licensed or approved by regulatory authorities in some countries, and included in vaccination programs. These vaccines target diverse viral and parasitic diseases (hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, malaria, herpes zoster, and (pre)pandemic influenza), and were developed for widely different target populations (e.g. individuals with renal impairment, girls and young women, infants and children living in Africa, adults 50 years of age and older, and the general population). Clearly, the safety profile of one vaccine in one target population cannot be extrapolated to another vaccine or to another target population, even for vaccines containing the same adjuvant. Therefore, the assessment of adjuvant safety poses specific challenges. In this review we provide a historical perspective on how AS were developed from the angle of the challenges encountered on safety evaluation during clinical development and after licensure, and illustrate how these challenges have been met to date. Methods to evaluate safety of adjuvants have evolved based on the availability of new technologies allowing a better understanding of their mode of action, and new ways of collecting and assessing safety information. Since 2005, safety experience with AS has accumulated with their use in diverse vaccines and in markedly different populations, in national immunization programs, and in a pandemic setting. Thirteen years of experience using antigens combined with AS attest to their acceptable safety profile. Methods developed to assess the safety of vaccines containing AS have progressed the way we understand and investigate vaccine safety, and have helped set new standards that will guide and support new candidate vaccine development, particularly those using new adjuvants.Focus on the patientWhat is the context? Adjuvants are immunostimulants used to modulate and enhance the immune response induced by vaccination. Since the 1990s, adjuvantation has moved toward combining several immunostimulants in the form of Adjuvant System(s) (AS), rather than relying on a single immunostimulant. AS have enabled the development of new vaccines targeting diseases and/or populations with special challenges that were previously not feasible using classical vaccine technology.What is new? In the last 13 years, several AS-containing vaccines have been studied targeting different diseases and populations. Over this period, overall vaccine safety has been monitored and real-life safety profiles have been assessed following routine use in the general population in many countries. Moreover, new methods for safety assessment, such as a better determination of the mode of action, have been implemented in order to help understand the safety characteristics of AS-containing vaccines.What is the impact? New standards and safety experience accumulated over the last decade can guide and help support the safety assessment of new candidate vaccines during development.     

Non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein vaccine in adults with COPD: A phase 2 clinical trial

Loss of airway microbial diversity is associated with non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae (NTHi) infection and increased risk of exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of an investigational vaccine containing NTHi antigens, recombinant protein D (PD) and combined protein E and Pilin A (PE-PilA), and AS01 adjuvant in adults with moderate/severe COPD and prior exacerbations.In this phase 2, observer-blind, controlled trial (NCT02075541), 145 COPD patients aged 40–80 years randomly (1:1) received two doses of NTHi vaccine or placebo 60 days apart, on top of standard care.Reactogenicity in the 7-day post-vaccination period was higher following NTHi vaccine than placebo. Most solicited adverse events (AEs) were mild/moderate. At least one unsolicited AE was reported during the 30-day post-vaccination period by 54.8% of NTHi vaccine and 51.4% of placebo recipients. One serious AE (placebo group) was assessed by the investigator as vaccine-related. Anti-PD, anti-PE and anti-PilA geometric mean antibody concentrations increased up to 30 days after each NTHi vaccine dose, waned thereafter, but remained higher than baseline (non-overlapping confidence intervals) up to 13 months post-dose 2. The frequency of specific CD4⁺ T cells increased following two doses of NTHi vaccine and remained higher than baseline. Exploratory analysis showed a statistically non-significant lower yearly rate of moderate/severe exacerbations in the NTHi vaccine group than following placebo (1.49 versus 1.73) in the one-year period post-dose 2, with estimated vaccine efficacy of 13.3% (95% confidence interval −24.2 to 39.5; p = 0.44).The NTHi vaccine had an acceptable safety and reactogenicity profile and good immunogenicity in adults with COPD.     

The Impact of Frailty and Comorbidity on Institutionalization and Mortality in Persons With Dementia: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objectives

The predictive value of frailty and comorbidity, in addition to more readily available information, is not widely studied. We determined the incremental predictive value of frailty and comorbidity for mortality and institutionalization across both short and long prediction periods in persons with dementia.

Sex Disparities in Risk of Mortality Among Children With ESRD

1. Download high-res image (377KB)
2. Download full-size image