针对免疫力低下患者群体的 COVID-19 疫苗接种建议:美国德尔菲小组和共识声明的产生。

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Infectious Diseases and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1007/s40121-024-01052-8
Kira Zhi Hua Lai, Stuart Greenstein, Rajesh Govindasamy, Jaya Paranilam, Joseph Brown, Samantha Kimball-Carroll
{"title":"针对免疫力低下患者群体的 COVID-19 疫苗接种建议:美国德尔菲小组和共识声明的产生。","authors":"Kira Zhi Hua Lai, Stuart Greenstein, Rajesh Govindasamy, Jaya Paranilam, Joseph Brown, Samantha Kimball-Carroll","doi":"10.1007/s40121-024-01052-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The United States Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommend COVID-19 vaccines for all immunocompromised individuals. Certain disease groups are at increased risk of comorbidity and death for which disease-specific recommendations should be considered. The objective of the Delphi panel of experts was to summarize expert consensus on COVID-19 vaccinations for patients with rheumatologic disease, renal disease, hematologic malignancy and solid organ transplant (SOT) in the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-stage Delphi panel method was employed, starting with qualitative interviews with key opinion leaders (KOLs) in the four disease areas (n = 4 KOLs, n = 16 total) followed by three rounds of iterative revision of disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. Final consensus was rated after the third round. Statements addressed primary and booster dosing (e.g., number and frequency) and other considerations such as vaccine type or heterologous messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccination. Following the Delphi Panel, an online survey was conducted to assess physician agreement within the disease areas (n = 50 each, n = 200 total) with the consensus statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all primary series vaccination statements across disease groups, except one in hematology. Similarly, moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all booster series statements in all disease areas. However, statements on antibody titer measurements for re-vaccination considerations and higher dosages for immunocompromised patients did not reach agreement. Overall, approximately 62%-96% of physicians strongly agreed with the primary and booster vaccine recommendations. However, low agreement (29%-69%) was found among physicians for time interval between disease-specific treatment and vaccination, recommendations for mRNA vaccines, heterologous mRNA vaccination, antibody titer measurement and higher vaccine dosage for immunocompromised groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consensus was achieved for disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations concerning primary and booster series vaccines and was generally well accepted by practicing physicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":13592,"journal":{"name":"Infectious Diseases and Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11499552/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 Vaccination Recommendations for Immunocompromised Patient Populations: Delphi Panel and Consensus Statement Generation in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Kira Zhi Hua Lai, Stuart Greenstein, Rajesh Govindasamy, Jaya Paranilam, Joseph Brown, Samantha Kimball-Carroll\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40121-024-01052-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The United States Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommend COVID-19 vaccines for all immunocompromised individuals. Certain disease groups are at increased risk of comorbidity and death for which disease-specific recommendations should be considered. The objective of the Delphi panel of experts was to summarize expert consensus on COVID-19 vaccinations for patients with rheumatologic disease, renal disease, hematologic malignancy and solid organ transplant (SOT) in the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-stage Delphi panel method was employed, starting with qualitative interviews with key opinion leaders (KOLs) in the four disease areas (n = 4 KOLs, n = 16 total) followed by three rounds of iterative revision of disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. Final consensus was rated after the third round. Statements addressed primary and booster dosing (e.g., number and frequency) and other considerations such as vaccine type or heterologous messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccination. Following the Delphi Panel, an online survey was conducted to assess physician agreement within the disease areas (n = 50 each, n = 200 total) with the consensus statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all primary series vaccination statements across disease groups, except one in hematology. Similarly, moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all booster series statements in all disease areas. However, statements on antibody titer measurements for re-vaccination considerations and higher dosages for immunocompromised patients did not reach agreement. Overall, approximately 62%-96% of physicians strongly agreed with the primary and booster vaccine recommendations. However, low agreement (29%-69%) was found among physicians for time interval between disease-specific treatment and vaccination, recommendations for mRNA vaccines, heterologous mRNA vaccination, antibody titer measurement and higher vaccine dosage for immunocompromised groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consensus was achieved for disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations concerning primary and booster series vaccines and was generally well accepted by practicing physicians.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13592,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infectious Diseases and Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11499552/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infectious Diseases and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-024-01052-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infectious Diseases and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-024-01052-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:美国免疫实践咨询委员会 (ACIP) 和美国疾病控制中心 (CDC) 建议所有免疫力低下的人接种 COVID-19 疫苗。某些疾病群体的合并症和死亡风险较高,因此应考虑针对特定疾病的建议。德尔菲专家小组的目标是总结美国风湿病、肾病、血液系统恶性肿瘤和实体器官移植 (SOT) 患者接种 COVID-19 疫苗的专家共识:采用两阶段德尔菲小组法,首先对四个疾病领域的关键意见领袖(KOL)进行定性访谈(KOL 人数=4,共 16 人),然后对特定疾病的 COVID-19 疫苗建议进行三轮反复修订。第三轮后评定出最终共识。声明涉及初次接种和加强接种剂量(如次数和频率)以及疫苗类型或异源信使核糖核酸 (mRNA) 疫苗接种等其他考虑因素。德尔菲小组会议结束后,进行了一项在线调查,以评估疾病领域内的医生(每个领域 50 人,共 200 人)对共识声明的同意程度:结果:各疾病组的所有初级系列疫苗接种声明都达成了中度到高度共识,只有血液病组例外。同样,所有疾病领域的所有强化免疫接种声明也都达成了中度到高度共识。但是,关于抗体滴度测量以考虑再次接种以及免疫力低下患者接种更大剂量疫苗的声明未达成一致意见。总体而言,约 62%-96% 的医生非常同意初种和加强接种疫苗的建议。然而,对于疾病特异性治疗与疫苗接种之间的时间间隔、mRNA 疫苗的建议、异源 mRNA 疫苗接种、抗体滴度测量以及免疫力低下人群的较高疫苗剂量,医生之间的共识度较低(29%-69%):结论:针对特定疾病的 COVID-19 疫苗接种建议在初种和加强系列疫苗接种方面达成了共识,并得到了执业医生的普遍认可。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19 Vaccination Recommendations for Immunocompromised Patient Populations: Delphi Panel and Consensus Statement Generation in the United States.

Introduction: The United States Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommend COVID-19 vaccines for all immunocompromised individuals. Certain disease groups are at increased risk of comorbidity and death for which disease-specific recommendations should be considered. The objective of the Delphi panel of experts was to summarize expert consensus on COVID-19 vaccinations for patients with rheumatologic disease, renal disease, hematologic malignancy and solid organ transplant (SOT) in the US.

Methods: A two-stage Delphi panel method was employed, starting with qualitative interviews with key opinion leaders (KOLs) in the four disease areas (n = 4 KOLs, n = 16 total) followed by three rounds of iterative revision of disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. Final consensus was rated after the third round. Statements addressed primary and booster dosing (e.g., number and frequency) and other considerations such as vaccine type or heterologous messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccination. Following the Delphi Panel, an online survey was conducted to assess physician agreement within the disease areas (n = 50 each, n = 200 total) with the consensus statements.

Results: Moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all primary series vaccination statements across disease groups, except one in hematology. Similarly, moderate to strong consensus was achieved for all booster series statements in all disease areas. However, statements on antibody titer measurements for re-vaccination considerations and higher dosages for immunocompromised patients did not reach agreement. Overall, approximately 62%-96% of physicians strongly agreed with the primary and booster vaccine recommendations. However, low agreement (29%-69%) was found among physicians for time interval between disease-specific treatment and vaccination, recommendations for mRNA vaccines, heterologous mRNA vaccination, antibody titer measurement and higher vaccine dosage for immunocompromised groups.

Conclusion: Consensus was achieved for disease-specific COVID-19 vaccine recommendations concerning primary and booster series vaccines and was generally well accepted by practicing physicians.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Infectious Diseases and Therapy
Infectious Diseases and Therapy Medicine-Microbiology (medical)
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
136
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Infectious Diseases and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of infectious disease therapies and interventions, including vaccines and devices. Studies relating to diagnostic products and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, bacterial and fungal infections, viral infections (including HIV/AIDS and hepatitis), parasitological diseases, tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases, vaccinations and other interventions, and drug-resistance, chronic infections, epidemiology and tropical, emergent, pediatric, dermal and sexually-transmitted diseases.
期刊最新文献
Heartfelt Impact: A Descriptive Analysis of Ceftaroline-Containing Regimens in Endocarditis due to Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Correction to: Understanding the Sequelae of Invasive Meningococcal Disease in the United States. Acute Cerebellitis Following COVID-19: Alarming Clinical Presentation Challenged by Normal Paraclinical Findings. Letter to the Editor: "Real-World Effectiveness of Ensitrelvir in Reducing Severe Outcomes in Outpatients at High Risk for COVID-19". Combination Versus Monotherapy for Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter Species Serious Infections: A Prospective IPTW Adjusted Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1