Diagnóstico de infecção bacteriana do trato urinário inferior pelo exame à fresco de urina

Orientador: Maria Terezinha Carneiro Leão LemeCo-orientador: Daltro ZuninoDissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Federal do Parana, Setor de Ciencias da SaudeResumo: As infecções do trato urinário (ITU) representam uma das doenças infecciosas mais encontradas na atual prática médica. Este estudo focaliza a forma mais comum de ITU não complicada: a cistite bacteriana, também denominada infecção bacteriana do trato urinário inferior, em mulheres agudamente disúricas, não-grávidas. Os objetivos deste estudo foram detectar infecção bacteriana do trato urinário inferior através de fita reagente e de exame microscópico, realizados no momento da consulta. Foram estudadas 118 pacientes ambulatoriais, no Hospital de Clínicas da Universidade Federal do Paraná no período de julho a dezembro de 1991, cuja queixa principal era disúria (queimação e ardência para urinar foram os termos mais utilizados pelas pacientes). A duração ou exacerbação dos sintomas deveria ser, no máximo, de 3 semanas. Foram excluídas pacientes que fizeram uso de antibiótico nas 2 semanas precedentes ao atendimento. A urina era coletada no momento da consulta e imediatamente submetida à análise pela fita reagente, para pesquisa de leucócitos, hemácias e nitrito e ao exame microscópico, utilizando-se câmara de contagem de células (câmara de Neubauer), para contagem de leucócitos e hemácias e quantificação de bacteriúria. Baseado nos trabalhos mais recentes da literatura, considerouse como portadora de cistite bacteriana, toda paciente com urocultura com contagem de colónias maior que 100 bactérias / ml. A prevalência de ITU bacteriana, neste estudo, foi de 35,6%. A alta sensibilidade da leucocitúria (aproximadamente 90%) torna o diagnóstico de cistite bacteriana, na ausência de leucocitúria, muito pouco provável. Cerca de 1/2 a 2/3 das pacientes com ITU apresentaram hematúria. A especificidade de 100% à pesquisa de nitrito, significa dizer que nitrito positivo é igual à cistite bacteriana. A vantagem do exame microscópico é permitir a pesquisa de bacteriúria, que apresenta os índices de sensibilidade, especificidade, valor preditivo positivo, valor preditivo negativo e acurácia de aproximadamente 90%, predicados de grande destaque para qualquer teste-diagnóstico. A maioria das ITU foi causada por bactérias gram-negativas (83,33%), destacandose Escherichia coli (69,05% do total). O germe gram-positivo mais freqüentemente isolado foi Staphylococcus saprophyticus (14,28% do total). Destaca-se a alta resistência das bactérias gram-negativas à ampicilina e à associação sulfametoxazol-trimetoprim, 50,00% e 43,74% respectivamente. O exame de urina não-corada e não-centrifugada, colhida no momento da consulta, através da fita reagente e do exame microscópico, demonstrou ser um método simples, de baixo custo, de fácil execução e eficaz no diagnóstico de cistite bacteriana em mulheres não-grávidas agudamente disúricas.Abstract: Urinary tract infections (UTI) are included among the most common infectious diseases in clinical practice. This project focused the most common form of non-complicated UTI: bacterial cystitis, also known as lower urinary tract infection, in non-pregnant acutely dysuric women. The purposes of this project were to detect bacterial infection of the lower urinary tract by means of reactive stripe and by light microscopic examination, in urine collected at the moment of consultation. One-hundred eighteen out-patients whose chief complaint was dysuria ("burning" was the most frequently used term by the patients) were studied at the Hospital de Clínicas of the Universidade Federal do Paraná from July through December 1991. The duration or exacerbation of symptoms should be of 3 weeks, at the most. Patients that had used antimicrobial drugs during the 2 weeks that preceded the consultaion were not included. Urine was collected at the moment of consultation and analyzed both by reagent stripe (searching for WBC, RBC and nitrite) and light microscopy, using the cell count chamber (Neubauer chamber) for WBC and RBC counting and measuring of bacteriuria. Based in recent literature data, was considered with bacterial cystitis every patient with colony counting greater than 100 bacteria / ml. Prevalence of bacterial UTI in this study was 35.6%. The high sensitivity of leucocyturia (approximately 90%) renders the diagnosis of bacterial cystitis very unlikely in the absense of this finding. Approximately one-half to two-thirds of patients with UTI had hematuria. The 100% specificity on the search for nitrite means that positive nitrite equals bacterial cystitis. The advantage of microscopic examination is to allow the search of bacteriuria, that has sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value indices and accuracy of approximately 90%, features of great significance for any diagnostic test. The majority of UTI was caused by Gram-negative bacteria (83,33%), mainly Escherichia coli (69,05% of total). The mainly Gram-positive germ isolated was Staphylococcus saprophyticus (14,28% of total). It is stressed the high resistance rate of Gram-negative bacteria to ampicillin and to the association sulphametoxazole-trimetoprim, 50,00% and 43,74%, respectively. Examination of fresh uncentrifugated and unstained urine, collected at the moment of consultation, showed to be a simple, effective, low-cost, and easily performed method for detection of bacterial cystitis in acutely dysuric non-pregnant women

A Phase III, randomized study to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of an MF59®-adjuvanted A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccine in HIV-positive adults

AbstractBackground and aimsAntibody responses to vaccines are suboptimal in immunosuppressed HIV-positive individuals. This study aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of MF59® adjuvant or a second A/H1N1 influenza vaccine dose in HIV-positive adults.MethodHIV-positive adults (n=61) and HIV-negative controls (n=93) aged 18–60years received two doses of A/H1N1, either as MF59-adjuvanted A/H1N1 pandemic vaccine, or as part of a unadjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine containing the pandemic strain. Immunogenicity was assessed against the vaccine strain, A/California/7/2009, by haemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay three weeks after the administration of each vaccine dose. Local and systemic reactions were recorded for three days after each vaccination. Unsolicited adverse events were recorded throughout the six-week study period.ResultsBoth adjuvanted and unadjuvanted vaccines met the European licensure criteria in HIV-positive and HIV-negative study groups after a single dose. Lower antibody titres were observed with both adjuvanted and unadjuvanted vaccine in HIV-positive compared to HIV-negative subjects. A second dose of either vaccine did not compensate for the lower response of HIV-infected subjects. In HIV-positive subjects, CD4+ T cell counts and levels of CD38 expression on CD8+ T cells remained stable throughout the study period. Both vaccine formulations were generally well tolerated, with no increased reactogenicity observed in response to the adjuvanted vaccine.ConclusionAntibody responses in HIV-positive subjects were acceptable but lower than those in healthy control subjects, whether subjects were immunized with one or two doses of adjuvanted or unadjuvanted vaccine. Vaccination did not affect rates of HIV replication, CD4+ T cells counts, or levels of CD38 expression among patients under successful antiretroviral treatment

Management of infection by the Zika virus

A panel of national experts was convened by the Brazilian Infectious Diseases Society in order to organize the national recommendations for the management of zika virus infection. The focus of this document is the diagnosis, both clinical and laboratorial, and appropriate treatment of the diverse manifestations of this infection, ranging from acute mild disease to Guillain-Barré syndrome and also microcephaly and congenital malformations.1

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2 : an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine : a pooled analysis of four randomised trials

Background The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4–12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. Methods We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials—one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)—and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5×10¹⁰ viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2×10¹⁰ viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAATpositive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). Findings Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4–74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3–85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59–0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3–91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0–69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18–55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01–2·68]). Interpretation The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose

SDSS-III: Massive Spectroscopic Surveys of the Distant Universe, the Milky Way Galaxy, and Extra-Solar Planetary Systems

Building on the legacy of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS-I and II), SDSS-III is a program of four spectroscopic surveys on three scientific themes: dark energy and cosmological parameters, the history and structure of the Milky Way, and the population of giant planets around other stars. In keeping with SDSS tradition, SDSS-III will provide regular public releases of all its data, beginning with SDSS DR8 (which occurred in Jan 2011). This paper presents an overview of the four SDSS-III surveys. BOSS will measure redshifts of 1.5 million massive galaxies and Lya forest spectra of 150,000 quasars, using the BAO feature of large scale structure to obtain percent-level determinations of the distance scale and Hubble expansion rate at z<0.7 and at z~2.5. SEGUE-2, which is now completed, measured medium-resolution (R=1800) optical spectra of 118,000 stars in a variety of target categories, probing chemical evolution, stellar kinematics and substructure, and the mass profile of the dark matter halo from the solar neighborhood to distances of 100 kpc. APOGEE will obtain high-resolution (R~30,000), high signal-to-noise (S/N>100 per resolution element), H-band (1.51-1.70 micron) spectra of 10^5 evolved, late-type stars, measuring separate abundances for ~15 elements per star and creating the first high-precision spectroscopic survey of all Galactic stellar populations (bulge, bar, disks, halo) with a uniform set of stellar tracers and spectral diagnostics. MARVELS will monitor radial velocities of more than 8000 FGK stars with the sensitivity and cadence (10-40 m/s, ~24 visits per star) needed to detect giant planets with periods up to two years, providing an unprecedented data set for understanding the formation and dynamical evolution of giant planet systems. (Abridged)Comment: Revised to version published in The Astronomical Journa

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca