Vaccine最新文献

One of the main causes of human brucellosis is Brucella melitensis infecting small ruminants. To date, Rev1 is the only vaccine successfully used to control ovine and caprine brucellosis. However, it is pathogenic for pregnant animals, resulting in abortions and vaginal and milk shedding, as well as being infectious for humans. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop an effective vaccine that is safer than Rev1. In efforts to further attenuate Rev1, we recently used wzm inactivation to generate a rough mutant (Rev1Δwzm) that retains a complete antigenic O-polysaccharide in the bacterial cytoplasm. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the placental pathogenicity of Rev1Δwzm in trophoblastic cells, throughout pregnancy in mice, and in ewes inoculated in different trimesters of pregnancy. This mutant was evaluated in comparison with the homologous 16MΔwzm derived from a virulent strain of B. melitensis and the naturally rough sheep pathogen B. ovis. Our results show that both wzm mutants triggered reduced cytotoxic, pro-apoptotic, and pro-inflammatory signaling in Bewo trophoblasts, as well as reduced relative expression of apoptosis genes. In mice, both wzm mutants produced infection but were rapidly cleared from the placenta, in which only Rev1Δwzm induced a low relative expression of pro-apoptotic and pro-inflammatory genes. In the 66 inoculated ewes, Rev1Δwzm was safe and immunogenic, displaying a transient serological interference in standard RBT but not CFT S-LPS tests; this serological response was minimized by conjunctival administration. In conclusion, these results support that B. melitensis Rev1Δwzm is a promising vaccine candidate for use in pregnant ewes and its efficacy against B. melitensis and B. ovis infections in sheep warrants further study.

The eight U.S. territories and freely associated states (TFAS) have historically faced unique social and structural barriers in the implementation of vaccination programs due to geographic remoteness, a high prevalence of socioeconomic disparities, increasing prevalence of natural disasters, limited vaccine providers and clinics, difficulties with procurement and shipping, and difficulty tracking highly mobile populations. In the months leading up to emergency authorizations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines, the TFAS developed tailored vaccination strategies to ensure that key at-risk populations received timely vaccination, and successfully implemented these strategies during the first six months of the vaccine rollout. Subject matter experts supporting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19 Response recognized the unique historical, geographic, social, and cultural dynamics for residents in the TFAS and worked with partners to prevent, detect, and respond to the pandemic in these jurisdictions. As a result of innovative partnerships and vaccine distribution strategies, vaccine equity was improved in the TFAS during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination has been recommended for children to protect them and to enable in-person educational and social activities.

Methods: We estimated COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness (VE) against school absenteeism in children 5-17 years old hospitalized from September 1, 2021 through May 31, 2023. Full vaccination was defined as two vaccine doses.

Results: We studied 231 children admitted to hospital with COVID-19, including 206 (89.2 %) unvaccinated/partially vaccinated and 25 (10.8 %) fully vaccinated. Unvaccinated/partially vaccinated children were absent from school for longer periods compared to fully vaccinated children (median absence: 14 versus 10 days; p-value = 0.05). Multivariable regression showed that full COVID-19 vaccination was associated with fewer days of absence compared to no/partial vaccination on average (adjusted relative risk: 0.77; 95 % CI: 0.61 to 0.98). COVID-19 VE was 50.7 % (95 % CI: -11.3 % to 78.2 %) for school absenteeism above the median duration of absenteeism.

Conclusions: Full COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against school absenteeism in hospitalized school-aged children with COVID-19.

Objective: Patients with autoimmune disease (AD) are at increased risk for complications from COVID-19 infection, so, optimizing vaccine utilization in this population is of particular importance. We compared COVID-19 vaccination perspectives among persons with and without AD.

Methods: 471 patients in the MetroHealth System and Cleveland Veteran Affairs Medical Center completed a 38-item questionnaire between August 2021 and February 2022. This survey containing questions regarding COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and demographics was administered both to unvaccinated individuals and individuals who delayed vaccination for at least 2 months. Multivariable ordinary least squares regression models were created to assess factors associated with vaccination likelihood.

Results: The number of reasons given for (p < 0.001) and against receiving COVID-19 vaccination (p < 0.001) were highly associated with increased and decreased vaccination likelihood respectively. Factors most closely associated with obtaining vaccine were: protecting family (p = 0.045) personal safety (p < 0.001) and preventing serious infection (p < 0.001). Reasons associated with decreased vaccination likelihood were: lack of concern of COVID-19 infection (p < 0.001), vaccine safety (p < 0.001) and beliefs that the vaccine was made too quickly (p = 0.024). AD patients were more likely to cite having a chronic condition (29.1 % vs 17.1 %, p = 0.003) and physician recommendation(s) (18.4 % vs 9.1 %, p = 0.005) as reasons for vaccination and were more concerned about potential medication interaction than non-AD respondents (22.4 % vs 3.3 %, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The number of benefits of vaccination identified strongly related to vaccination likelihood. Affirmative provider recommendations correlated with increased vaccination likelihood in AD patients. Clinical conversations centered on the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination may help increase vaccine acceptance.

Background: The cross-protection of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) against serotype 6C is not clearly documented, although 6C represents a substantial burden of pneumococcal disease in recent years. A systematic review by the World Health Organization that covered studies through 2016 concluded that available data were insufficient to determine if either PCV10 (which contains serotype 6B but not 6A) or PCV13 (containing serotype 6A and 6B) conferred protection against 6C.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies published between January 2010 - August 2022 (Medline/Embase), covering the direct, indirect, and overall effect of PCV10 and PCV13 against 6C invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), non-IPD, nasopharyngeal carriage (NPC), and antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

Results: Of 2548 publications identified, 112 were included. Direct vaccine effectiveness against 6C IPD in children ranged between 70 and 85 % for ≥ 1 dose PCV13 (n = 3 studies), was 94 % in fully PCV13 vaccinated children (n = 2), and -14 % for ≥ 1 dose of PCV10 (n = 1). Compared to PCV7, PCV13 efficacy against 6C NPC in children was 66 % (n = 1). Serotype 6C IPD rates or NPC prevalence declined post-PCV13 in most studies in children (n = 5/6) and almost half of studies in adults (n = 5/11), while it increased post-PCV10 for IPD and non-IPD in all studies (n = 6/6). Changes in AMR prevalence were inconsistent.

Conclusions: In contrast to PCV10, PCV13 vaccination consistently protected against 6C IPD and NPC in children, and provided some level of indirect protection to adults, supporting that serotype 6A but not 6B provides cross-protection to 6C. Vaccine policy makers and regulators should consider the effects of serotype 6A-containing PCVs against serotype 6C disease in their decisions.

Background: Health worker vaccination programmes can help to safeguard both health workers (HWs) and their patients and enhance vaccine uptake more broadly in local communities and society. This study's objective was to increase global understanding of how existing HW vaccination programmes were leveraged for emergency COVID-19 vaccine introduction.

Methods: This qualitative study included 13 in-depth group interviews with 38 key informants with expertise in vaccine programme implementation from eleven countries in five WHO regions: Albania, Armenia, Bhutan, Lao PDR, Maldives, Mongolia, Oman, Timor Leste, the United Kingdom, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe in addition to WHO regional focal points from all six regions. These interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. Key informants reviewed the initial results and validated the key findings.

Results: Informants characterized key components of both routine and seasonal influenza vaccination programmes that were leveraged for the emergency vaccination of HWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. We identified a set of cross-cutting factors that were used for COVID-19 vaccine roll out: 1) pre-existing occupational health policies, 2) adequate human resources, 3) well-functioning data information systems and vaccine delivery platforms, and 4) established communication channels. Across the eleven countries and six regions interviewed, the ability to adapt existing influenza or other health worker vaccination infrastructure was beneficial for their pandemic response.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest a strong justification for enhanced investment in vaccination of health workers, particularly against seasonal influenza, through country-wide programmes as a foundation for pandemic preparedness and response.