-
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2024Human adenoviruses (HAdVs) have always been suggested as one of the main causes of gastroenteritis in children. However, no comprehensive report on the global... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Human adenoviruses (HAdVs) have always been suggested as one of the main causes of gastroenteritis in children. However, no comprehensive report on the global epidemiology of these viruses in pediatric gastroenteritis is available.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted to obtain published papers from 2003 to 2023 in three main databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science.
RESULTS
The estimated global pooled prevalence of HAdV infection in children with gastroenteritis was 10% (95% CI: 9-11%), with a growing trend after 2010. The highest prevalence was observed in Africa (20%, 95% CI: 14-26%). The prevalence was higher in inpatients (11%; 95% CI: 8-13%) and patients aged 5 years old and younger (9%; 95% CI: 7-10%). However, no significant difference was observed between male and female patients (P = 0.63). The most prevalent species was found to be the species F (57%; 95% CI: 41-72%). The most common HAdVs observed in children with gastroenteritis were types 40/41, 38, and 2. Analysis of case-control studies showed an association between HAdV and gastroenteritis in children (OR: 2.28, 95% CI; 1.51-3.44).
CONCLUSION
This study provided valuable insights into the importance of HAdVs in children with gastroenteritis, especially in hospitalized and younger children. The results can be used in future preventive measurements and the development of effective vaccines.
Topics: Humans; Gastroenteritis; Adenoviruses, Human; Adenovirus Infections, Human; Child, Preschool; Child; Infant; Prevalence; Female; Male
PubMed: 38724898
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09386-x -
The Lancet. Global Health Jun 2024Information on the causes of deaths from diarrhoea in children younger than 5 years is needed to design improved preventive and therapeutic approaches. We aimed to...
BACKGROUND
Information on the causes of deaths from diarrhoea in children younger than 5 years is needed to design improved preventive and therapeutic approaches. We aimed to conduct a systematic analysis of studies to report estimates of the causes of deaths from diarrhoea in children younger than 5 years at global and regional levels during 2000-21.
METHODS
For this systematic review and Bayesian multinomial analysis, we included 12 pathogens with the highest attributable incidence in the Global Enteric Multicenter Study. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Global Health Index Medicus, Global Health OVID, IndMed, Health Information Platform for the Americas (PLISA), Africa-Wide Information, and Cochrane Collaboration for articles published between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2020, using the search terms "child", "hospital", "diarrhea", "diarrhoea", "dysentery", "rotavirus", "Escherichia coli", "salmonella", "shigella", "campylobacter", "Vibrio cholerae", "cryptosporidium", "norovirus", "astrovirus", "sapovirus", and "adenovirus". To be included, studies had to have a patient population of children younger than 5 years who were hospitalised for diarrhoea (at least 90% of study participants), at least a 12-month duration, reported prevalence in diarrhoeal stools of at least two of the 12 pathogens, all patients with diarrhoea being included at the study site or a systematic sample, at least 100 patients with diarrhoea, laboratory tests done on rectal swabs or stool samples, and standard laboratory methods (ie, quantitative PCR [qPCR] or non-qPCR). Studies published in any language were included. Studies were excluded if they were limited to nosocomial, chronic, antibiotic-associated, or outbreak diarrhoea or to a specific population (eg, only children with HIV or AIDS). Each article was independently reviewed by two researchers; a third arbitrated in case of disagreement. If both reviewers identified an exclusion criterion, the study was excluded. Data sought were summary estimates. Data on causes from published studies were adjusted when necessary to account for the poor sensitivity of non-qPCR methods and for attributable fraction based on quantification of pathogens in children who are ill or non-ill. The causes of deaths from diarrhoea were modelled on the causes of hospitalisations for diarrhoea. We separately modelled studies reporting causes of diarrhoea in children who were hospitalised in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and in high-income countries (HICs).
FINDINGS
Of 74 282 papers identified in the initial database search, we included 138 studies (91 included data from LMICs and 47 included data from HICs) from 73 countries. We modelled estimates for 194 WHO member states (hereafter referred to as countries), including 42 HICs and 152 LMICs. We could attribute a cause to 1 003 448 (83·8%) of the estimated 1 197 044 global deaths from diarrhoea in children younger than 5 years in 2000 and 360 730 (81·3%) of the estimated 443 833 global deaths from diarrhoea in children younger than 5 years in 2021. The cause with the largest estimated global attribution was rotavirus; in LMICs, the proportion of deaths from diarrhoea due to rotavirus in children younger than 5 years appeared lower in 2021 (108 322 [24·4%] of 443 342, 95% uncertainty interval 21·6-29·5) than in 2000 (316 382 [26·5%] of 1 196 134, 25·7-28·5), but the 95% CIs overlapped. In 2000, the second largest estimated attribution was norovirus GII (95 817 [8·0%] of 1 196 134 in LMICs and 225 [24·7%] of 910 in HICs); in 2021, Shigella sp had the second largest estimated attribution in LMICs (36 082 [8·1%] of 443 342), but norovirus remained with the second largest estimated attribution in HICs (84 [17·1%] of 490).
INTERPRETATION
Our results indicate progress in the reduction of deaths from diarrhoea caused by 12 pathogens in children younger than 5 years in the past two decades. There is a need to increase efforts for prevention, including with rotavirus vaccine, and treatment to eliminate further deaths.
FUNDING
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation via Johns Hopkins University and the University of Virginia.
Topics: Humans; Diarrhea; Bayes Theorem; Infant; Child, Preschool; Global Health; Cause of Death; Infant, Newborn
PubMed: 38648812
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00078-0 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Mar 2024In addition to preventing pneumococcal disease, emerging evidence indicates that pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) might indirectly reduce viral respiratory tract...
BACKGROUND
In addition to preventing pneumococcal disease, emerging evidence indicates that pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) might indirectly reduce viral respiratory tract infections (RTI) by affecting pneumococcal-viral interactions.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of interventional and observational studies published during 2000-2022 on vaccine efficacy/adjusted effectiveness (VE) and overall effect of PCV7, PCV9, PCV10, or PCV13 against viral RTI.
RESULTS
Sixteen of 1671 records identified were included. Thirteen publications described effects of PCVs against viral RTIs in children. VE against influenza ranged between 41-86% (n=4), except for the 2010-2011 influenza season. In a randomized controlled trial, PCV9 displayed efficacy against any viral RTI, human seasonal coronavirus, parainfluenza, and human metapneumovirus. Data in adults were limited (n=3). PCV13 VE ranged between 4-25% against viral lower RTI, 32-35% against COVID-19 outcomes, 24-51% against human seasonal coronavirus, and 13-36% against influenza A lower RTI, with some 95%CI spanning zero. No protection was found against adenovirus or rhinovirus in children or adults.
CONCLUSIONS
PCVs were associated with protection against some viral RTI, with the strongest evidence for influenza in children. Limited evidence for adults was generally consistent with pediatric data. Restricting public health evaluations to confirmed pneumococcal outcomes may underestimate the full impact of PCVs.
PubMed: 38462672
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiae125 -
Journal of Neurology Mar 2024Case-reports/series and cohorts of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) associated with COVID-19 vaccination have been reported. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Case-reports/series and cohorts of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) associated with COVID-19 vaccination have been reported.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of GBS after COVID-19 vaccination was carried out. Incidence and incidence rate ratio for a number of vaccine doses and risk of GBS, also considering the specific vaccine technology, were calculated in a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Of 554 citations retrieved, 518 were discarded as irrelevant. We finally included 15 studies. The random effect model yielded, regardless of the vaccine technology, 1.25 (95%CI 0.21; 2.83) GBS cases per million of COVID-19 vaccine doses, 3.93 (2.54; 5.54) cases per million doses for adenovirus-vectored vaccines and 0.69 (0.38; 1.06) cases per million doses for mRNA vaccines. The GBS risk was 2.6 times increased with the first dose. Regardless of the vaccine technology, the GBS risk was not increased but disaggregating the data it was 2.37 (1.67; 3.36) times increased for adenovirus-vectored vaccines and 0.32 (0.23; 0.47) for mRNA vaccines. Mortality for GBS after vaccination was 0.10 per million doses and 4.6 per GBS cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Adenovirus-vectored vaccines showed a 2.4 times increased risk of GBS that was about seven times higher compared with mRNA-based vaccines. The decreased GBS risk associated with mRNA vaccines was possibly due to an elicited reduction of infections, including SARS-CoV-2, associated with GBS during the vaccination period. How adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines may trigger GBS is unclear and further studies should investigate the relationship between vaccine technologies and GBS risk.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Guillain-Barre Syndrome; mRNA Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 38233678
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12186-7 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2023Numerous vaccination research experiments have been conducted on non-primate hosts to prevent or control HTLV-1 infection. Therefore, reviewing recent advancements for...
BACKGROUND
Numerous vaccination research experiments have been conducted on non-primate hosts to prevent or control HTLV-1 infection. Therefore, reviewing recent advancements for status assessment and strategic planning of future preventative actions to reduce HTLV-1 infection and its consequences would be essential.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from each database's inception through March 27, 2022. All original articles focusing on developing an HTLV-1 vaccine candidate were included.
RESULTS
A total of 47 studies were included. They used a variety of approaches to develop the HTLV-1 vaccine, including DNA-based, dendritic-cell-based, peptide/protein-based, and recombinant vaccinia virus approaches. The majority of the research that was included utilized Tax, Glycoprotein (GP), GAG, POL, REX, and HBZ as their main peptides in order to develop the vaccine. The immunization used in dendritic cell-based investigations, which were more recently published, was accomplished by an activated CD-8 T-cell response. Although there hasn't been much attention lately on this form of the vaccine, the initial attempts to develop an HTLV-1 immunization depended on recombinant vaccinia virus, and the majority of results seem positive and effective for this type of vaccine. Few studies were conducted on humans. Most of the studies were experimental studies using animal models. Adenovirus, Cytomegalovirus (CMV), vaccinia, baculovirus, hepatitis B, measles, and pox were the most commonly used vectors.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review reported recent progression in the development of HTLV-1 vaccines to identify candidates with the most promising preventive and therapeutic effects.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Human T-lymphotropic virus 1; HTLV-I Infections; T-Lymphocytes; Vaccinia virus; Viral Vaccines; Peptides
PubMed: 37170214
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08289-7 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Apr 2023There have been debates about the human appendix function, and while previous research suggested it might be a vestigial organ with no functional significance, recent... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There have been debates about the human appendix function, and while previous research suggested it might be a vestigial organ with no functional significance, recent studies have pointed out that it might have an important role in the immune system. Acute appendicitis (AA) is a common cause of emergency abdominal surgery in the world. Some epidemiologic investigations have found an association between appendicitis and viral infections. In this study, we have reviewed systematically articles to discover viral infections that cause appendicitis and find any possible correlations between the two.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed by searching among electronic databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE on viruses and appendicitis topics.
RESULTS
Conducted search leads to 983 results in all databases after the duplicate removal and screening by title, abstract, and full-text based on inclusion criteria lead to 19 studies. There were several assays to detect the viruses, which are thought to be AA causative agents. RT-PCR and immunoassays were the mainstay methods to detect the probable cause.
CONCLUSION
Investigations suggested that some viruses including measles virus (MV), influenza virus, dengue fever virus (DFV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human herpesviruses, rotavirus, and adenovirus are associated with acute appendicitis. Despite the available reports, the specific mechanisms behind the relationship between acute appendicitis and viral infections are yet to be understood. Therefore, further investigations are necessary to find out the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of viral complications in appendicitis.
Topics: Humans; Appendicitis; Appendix; Viruses; Appendectomy; Virus Diseases; Acute Disease
PubMed: 37069433
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04391-z -
Vaccines Mar 2023Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has effectively suppressed the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and alleviated its... (Review)
Review
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has effectively suppressed the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and alleviated its symptoms, but there are also many adverse events. Joint diseases caused by COVID-19 vaccine have been reported in many studies. Some are well-controlled arthritis patients who developed arthritis after COVID-19 vaccination, while others are new-onset joint pain and swelling problems after COVID-19 vaccination. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the literature reports in existing databases and analyze the incidence of new-onset arthritis after COVID-19 vaccination. We included 31 eligible articles and described 45 patients, ranging in age from 17 to over 90, with more females than males. The majority (84.4%) of patients received the adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) and the mRNA-based vaccine (BNT126b2 and mRNA-1273). Most (64.4%) patients developed joint-related symptoms after the first dose of vaccine, and 66.7% developed symptoms within the first week of vaccination. The joint symptoms involved were mainly joint swelling, joint pain, limited range of motion, and so on. A total of 71.1% of the patients involved multiple joints, both large and small; 28.9% of patients involved only a single joint. Some (33.3%) patients were confirmed by imaging, and the most common diagnoses were bursitis and synovitis. Two nonspecific inflammatory markers, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP), were monitored in almost all cases, and all patients showed varying degrees of increase in these two markers. Most of the patients received the treatment of glucocorticoid drugs or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Clinical symptoms markedly improved in most patients, with 26.7% making a full recovery and no relapse after a few months of follow-up. To determine whether there is a causal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and the triggering of arthritis, large-scale and well-controlled research studies are needed in the future to verify this relationship and to further study its pathogenesis in detail. Clinicians should raise awareness of this complication with a view to early diagnosis and appropriate treatment.
PubMed: 36992249
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11030665 -
Vaccines Dec 2022Vaccination is one of the most effective measures for children as the epidemic progresses. However, there is a significant research gap in the meta-analysis of the... (Review)
Review
Vaccination is one of the most effective measures for children as the epidemic progresses. However, there is a significant research gap in the meta-analysis of the COVID-19 vaccines for children younger than 18 years. This study is a comprehensive review of different COVID-19 vaccines. Published articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Twelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of COVID-19 vaccines were included in the review until 21 October 2022. Most local and systemic adverse reactions were predominantly mild to moderate in severity and disappeared quickly after different types of vaccines. The subunit vaccine had the highest safety. The significant risk was lower in the subunit vaccine group after the initial (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.26-2.17, = 0.0003) and booster vaccination (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02-1.92, = 0.04). Younger children had a more outstanding safety profile in the mRNA and inactivated vaccine groups. The humoral immune response was proportional to the number of doses in the inactivated and the adenovirus vaccine groups, and the strength of immunogenicity was negatively correlated with age in the inactivated vaccine. The mRNA and the subunit vaccines provided satisfactory prevention against COVID-19, especially seven days after the booster dose. However, more research and longer-term follow-up are needed to assess the duration of immune responses, efficacy, and safety.
PubMed: 36679932
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11010087 -
European Journal of Haematology Apr 2023This systematic review aimed to retrieve patients diagnosed with de novo immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) after COVID-19 immunization to determine their... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review aimed to retrieve patients diagnosed with de novo immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) after COVID-19 immunization to determine their epidemiological characteristics, clinical course, therapeutic strategies, and outcome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted the review using four major databases, comprising PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, until April 2022. A systematic search was performed in duplicate to access eligible articles in English. Furthermore, a manual search was applied to the chosen papers' references to enhance the search sensitivity. Data were extracted and analyzed with the SPSS 20.1 software.
RESULTS
A total of 77 patients with de novo COVID-19 vaccine-associated ITP were identified from 41 studies, including 31 case reports and 10 case series. The median age of patients who developed COVID-19 vaccine-associated ITP was 54 years (IQR 36-72 years). The mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, including BNT16B2b2 and mRNA-1273, were most implicated (75.4%). Those were followed by the adenovirus vector-based vaccines, inclusive of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and vAd26.COV2.S. No report was found relating ITP to other COVID-19 vaccines. Most cases (79.2%) developed ITP after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination. 75% of the patients developed ITP within 12 days of vaccination, indicating a shorter lag time compared to ITP after routine childhood vaccinations. Sixty-seven patients (87%) patients were hospitalized. The management pattern was similar to primary ITP, and systemic glucocorticoids, IVIg, or both were the basis of the treatment in most patients. Most patients achieved therapeutic goals; only two individuals required a secondary admission, and one patient who presented with intracranial hemorrhage died of the complication.
CONCLUSIONS
De novo ITP is a rare complication of COVID-19 vaccination, and corresponding reports belong to mRNA-based and adenovirus vector-based vaccines, in order of frequency. This frequency pattern may be related to the scale of administration of individual vaccines and their potency in inducing autoimmunity. The more the COVID-19 vaccine is potent to induce antigenic challenge, the shorter the lag time would be. Most patients had a benign course and responded to typical treatments of primary ITP.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Humans; Middle Aged; ChAdOx1 nCoV-19; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic; Vaccination
PubMed: 36562217
DOI: 10.1111/ejh.13917 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2022The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat, and fever (usually < 37.8 ºC). Whilst the common cold is generally not harmful, it is a cause of economic burden due to school and work absenteeism. In the United States, economic loss due to the common cold is estimated at more than USD 40 billion per year, including an estimate of 70 million workdays missed by employees, 189 million school days missed by children, and 126 million workdays missed by parents caring for children with a cold. Additionally, data from Europe show that the total cost per episode may be up to EUR 1102. There is also a large expenditure due to inappropriate antimicrobial prescription. Vaccine development for the common cold has been difficult due to antigenic variability of the common cold viruses; even bacteria can act as infective agents. Uncertainty remains regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people, thus we performed an update of this Cochrane Review, which was first published in 2011 and updated in 2013 and 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (April 2022), MEDLINE (1948 to April 2022), Embase (1974 to April 2022), CINAHL (1981 to April 2022), and LILACS (1982 to April 2022). We also searched three trials registers for ongoing studies, and four websites for additional trials (April 2022). We did not impose any language or date restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccine compared with placebo to prevent the common cold in healthy people.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used Cochrane's Screen4Me workflow to assess the initial search results. Four review authors independently performed title and abstract screening to identify potentially relevant studies. We retrieved the full-text articles for those studies deemed potentially relevant, and the review authors independently screened the full-text reports for inclusion in the review, recording reasons for exclusion of the excluded studies. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third review author when needed. Two review authors independently collected data on a data extraction form, resolving any disagreements by consensus or by involving a third review author. We double-checked data transferred into Review Manager 5 software. Three review authors independently assessed risk of bias using RoB 1 tool as outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We carried out statistical analysis using Review Manager 5. We did not conduct a meta-analysis, and we did not assess publication bias. We used GRADEpro GDT software to assess the certainty of the evidence and to create a summary of findings table. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any new RCTs for inclusion in this update. This review includes one RCT conducted in 1965 with an overall high risk of bias. The RCT included 2307 healthy young men in a military facility, all of whom were included in the analyses, and compared the effect of three adenovirus vaccines (live, inactivated type 4, and inactivated type 4 and 7) against a placebo (injection of physiological saline or gelatin capsule). There were 13 (1.14%) events in 1139 participants in the vaccine group, and 14 (1.19%) events in 1168 participants in the placebo group. Overall, we do not know if there is a difference between the adenovirus vaccine and placebo in reducing the incidence of the common cold (risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.02; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, no difference in adverse events when comparing live vaccine preparation with placebo was reported. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to very low due to unclear risk of bias, indirectness because the population of this study was only young men, and imprecision because confidence intervals were wide and the number of events was low. The included study did not assess vaccine-related or all-cause mortality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane Review was based on one study with very low-certainty evidence, which showed that there may be no difference between the adenovirus vaccine and placebo in reducing the incidence of the common cold. We identified a need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Future trials on interventions for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition, and should measure such outcomes as common cold incidence, vaccine safety, and mortality (all-cause and related to the vaccine).
Topics: Child; Humans; Male; Adenovirus Vaccines; Common Cold; Incidence; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Vaccines, Attenuated; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36515550
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002190.pub6