Clinical and Experimental Determination of Protection Afforded by BCG Vaccination against Infection with Non-Tuberculous Mycobacteria: A Role in Cystic Fibrosis?

Mycobacterium abscessus is a nontuberculous mycobacterium (NTM) of particular concern in individuals with obstructive lung diseases such as cystic fibrosis (CF). Treatment requires multiple drugs and is characterised by high rates of relapse; thus, new strategies to limit infection are urgently required. This study sought to determine how Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination may impact NTM infection, using a murine model of Mycobacterium abscessus infection and observational data from a non-BCG vaccinated CF cohort in Sydney, Australia and a BCG-vaccinated CF cohort in Cape Town, South Africa. In mice, BCG vaccination induced multifunctional antigen-specific CD up sup T cells circulating in the blood and was protective against dissemination of bacteria to the spleen. Prior infection with M. abscessus afforded the highest level of protection against M. abscessus challenge in the lung, and immunity was characterised by a greater frequency of pulmonary cytokine-secreting CD4 T cells compared to BCG vaccination. In the clinical CF cohorts, the overall rates of NTM sampling during a three-year period were equivalent; however, rates of NTM colonisation were significantly lower in the BCG-vaccinated (Cape Town) cohort, which was most apparent for M. abscessus. This study provides evidence that routine BCG vaccination may reduce M. abscessus colonisation in individuals with CF, which correlates with the ability of BCG to induce multifunctional CD4T cells recognising M. abscessus in a murine model. Further research is needed to determine the optimal strategies for limiting NTM infections in individuals with CF

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Insights into child care and early education: Fitzroy

This report is about families in Fitzroy (Victoria) with young children aged up to5 years. We were interested in what kind of education and care services thesefamilies want for their children, how they like the services they are getting, orwhy they are not using these services. We wanted to find out how to makeservices work in the best way possible.Therefore we conducted a research project in six neighbourhoods aroundAustralia, including Fitzroy. We talked to families about their early education andcare services: the services that they use or not, whether they like their situation,where they find information, whether they get any payments from government,what good care and education means to them and what would help them withgetting the care or education they want.This booklet says what we found out in Fitzroy

Insights into early child care and education: Elizabeth Grove

This is about families in Elizabeth Grove with young children aged up to 5 years.We were interested what kind of education and care services these familieswant for their children, and how they like the services they are getting. Wewanted to find out how to make services work in the best way possible.Therefore we did a research project in 6 neighbourhoods around Australia,including Elizabeth Grove. We talked to families about their early educationand care services: the services that they use or not, whether they like theirsituation, where they find information, whether they get any payments fromgovernment, what good care and education means to them and what wouldhelp them with getting the care or education they want.This booklet says what we found out in Elizabeth Grove