Performance of self-diagnosis and standby treatment of malaria in international oilfield service employees in the field

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Falciparum malaria remains a major occupational illness that accounts for several deaths per year and numerous lost working days among the expatriate population, working or living in high-risk malarious areas. Compliance to preventive strategies is poor in travellers, especially business travellers, expatriates and long-term travellers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this cross-sectional, web-based study the adherence to and outcome of a preventive malaria programme on knowledge, attitudes and practices, including the practice of self-diagnosis and standby treatment (curative malaria kit, CMK) was evaluated in 2,350 non-immune expatriates, who had been working in highly malaria endemic areas.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One-third (N = 648) of these expatriates visited a doctor for malaria symptoms and almost half (29 of 68) of all hospitalizations were due to malaria. The mandatory malaria training for non-immunes was completed by 92% of those who visited or worked in a high risk malaria country; 70% of the respondents at risk also received the CMK. The malaria awareness training and CMK significantly increased malaria knowledge [relative risk (RR) of 1.5, 95%CI 1.2–2.1], attitudes and practices, including compliance to chemoprophylaxis [RR = 2.2, 95%CI 1.6–3.2]. Hospitalization for malaria tended to be reduced by the programme [RR = 0.4, 95%CI 0.1–1.1], albeit not significantly. Respondents who did not receive instructions on the rapid diagnostic test were two times [RR = 2.3, 95%CI 1.6–3.3] more likely to have difficulties. Those who did receive instructions adhered poorly to the timing of repeating the test. Moreover, 6% (31 of 513) of those with a negative test result were diagnosed with malaria by a local doctor. 77% (N = 393) of the respondents with a negative test result did not take curative medication. 57% (252 of 441) of the respondents who took the curative medication that was included in the kit did not have a positive self-test or clinical malaria diagnosis made by a doctor.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This survey demonstrated that a comprehensive programme targeting malaria prevention in expatriates can be effectively implemented and that it significantly increased malaria awareness.</p

Elderly Subjects Have a Delayed Antibody Response and Prolonged Viraemia following Yellow Fever Vaccination: A Prospective Controlled Cohort Study

Yellow fever vaccination (YF-17D) can cause serious adverse events (SAEs). The mechanism of these SAEs is poorly understood. Older age has been identified as a risk factor. We tested the hypothesis that the humoral immune response to yellow fever vaccine develops more slowly in elderly than in younger subjects.We vaccinated young volunteers (18–28 yrs, N = 30) and elderly travelers (60–81 yrs, N = 28) with YF-17D and measured their neutralizing antibody titers and plasma YF-17D RNA copy numbers before vaccination and 3, 5, 10, 14 and 28 days after vaccination. = 0.02, using a mixed linear model. Viraemia was more common in the elderly (86%, 24/28) than in the younger participants (60%, 14/30) (p = 0.03) with higher YF-17D RNA copy numbers in the elderly participants.We found that elderly subjects had a delayed antibody response and higher viraemia levels after yellow fever primovaccination. We postulate that with older age, a weaker immune response to yellow fever vaccine allows the attenuated virus to cause higher viraemia levels which may increase the risk of developing SAEs. This may be one piece in the puzzle of the pathophysiology of YEL-AVD

Immunogenicity of an additional mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in people with HIV with hyporesponse after primary vaccination

Background:The COVIH study is a prospective coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination study in 1154 people with HIV (PWH), of whom 14% showed reduced antibody levels after primary vaccination. We evaluated whether an additional vaccination boosts immune responses in these hyporesponders. Methods: The primary end point was the increase in antibodies 28 days after additional mRNA-1273 vaccination. Secondary end points included neutralizing antibodies, S-specific T-cell and B-cell responses, and reactogenicity. Results:Of the 66 participants, 40 previously received 2 doses ChAdOx1-S, 22 received 2 doses BNT162b2, and 4 received a single dose Ad26.COV2.S. The median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 60–66), 86% were male, and median CD4 + T-cell count was 650/μL (IQR, 423–941). The mean S1-specific antibody level increased from 35 binding antibody units (BAU)/ mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 24–46) to 4317 BAU/mL (95% CI, 3275–5360) (P &lt; .0001). Of all participants, 97% showed an adequate response and the 45 antibody-negative participants all seroconverted. A significant increase in the proportion of PWH with ancestral S-specific CD4 + T cells (P = .04) and S-specific B cells (P = .02) was observed. Conclusions:An additional mRNA-1273 vaccination induced a robust serological response in 97% of PWH with a hyporesponse after primary vaccination.</p

Daily disease severity in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the hospital: The SCODA (severity of coronavirus disease assessment) score.

BackgroundA multitude of diagnostic and predictive algorithms have been designed for COVID-19. However, currently no score can accurately quantify and track day-to-day disease severity in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. We aimed to design such a score to improve pathophysiological insight in COVID-19.MethodsDevelopment of the Severity of COronavirus Disease Assessment (SCODA) score was based on the 4C Mortality score but patient demographic variables that remain constant during admission were excluded. Instead, parameters associated with breathing and oxygenation were added to reflect the daily condition. The SCODA score was subsequently applied to the BEAT-COVID cohort to describe COVID-19 severity over time and to determine the timing of clinical recovery for each patient, an important marker in pathophysiological studies. The BEAT-COVID study included patients with PCR confirmed COVID-19 who were hospitalized between April 2020 and March 2021 in the Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.ResultsThe SCODA score consists of 6 clinical and 2 routine lab parameters. 191 patients participated in the BEAT-COVID study. Median age was 66, and 74.4% was male. The modal timepoint at which recovery was clinically initiated occurred on days 8 and 24 since symptom onset for non-ICU and ICU-patients, respectively.ConclusionsWe developed a daily score which can be used to track disease severity of patients admitted due to COVID-19. This score is useful for improving insight in COVID-19 pathophysiology, its clinical course and to evaluate interventions. In a future stage this score can also be used in other (emerging) infectious respiratory diseases

Humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection among liver transplant recipients

Objective: Immunosuppressive agents are known to interfere with T and/or B lymphocytes, which are required to mount an adequate serologic response. Therefore, we aim to investigate the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in liver transplant (LT) recipients after COVID-19. Design: Prospective multicentre case-control study, analysing antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein, spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 and their neutralising activity in LT recipients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19-LT) compared with immunocompetent patients (COVID-19-immunocompetent) and LT recipients without COVID-19 symptoms (non-COVID-19-LT). Results: Overall, 35 LT recipients were included in the COVID-19-LT cohort. 35 and 70 subjects fulfilling the matching criteria were assigned to the COVID-19-immunocompetent and non-COVID-19-LT cohorts, respectively. We showed that LT recipients, despite immunosuppression and less symptoms, mounted a detectable antinucleocapsid antibody titre in 80% of the cases, although significantly lower compared with the COVID-19-immunocompetent cohort (3.73 vs 7.36 index level, p<0.001). When analysing anti-S antibody response, no difference in positivity rate was found between the COVID-19-LT and COVID-19-immunocompetent cohorts (97.1% vs 100%, p=0.314). Functional antibody testing showed neutralising activity in 82.9% of LT recipients (vs 100% in COVID-19-immunocompetent cohort, p=0.024). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the humoral response of LT recipients is only slightly lower than expected, compared with COVID-19 immunocompetent controls. Testing for anti-S antibodies alone can lead to an overestimation of the neutralising ability in LT recipients. Altogether, routine antibody testing against separate SARS-CoV-2 antigens and functional testing show that the far majority of LT patients are capable of mounting an adequate antibody response with neutralising ability