Comparing Influenza Vaccine Efficacy Against Mismatched And Matched Strains: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis

Background: Influenza vaccines are most effective when the antigens in the vaccine match those of circulating strains. However, antigens contained in the vaccines do not always match circulating strains. In the present work we aimed to examine the vaccine efficacy (VE) afforded by influenza vaccines when they are not well matched to circulating strains. Methods: We identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) through MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and references of included RCTs. RCTs reporting laboratory-confirmed influenza among healthy participants vaccinated with antigens of matching and non-matching influenza strains were included. Two independent reviewers screened citations/full-text articles, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. VE was calculated using the following formula: (1 - relative risk x 100%). Results: We included 34 RCTs, providing data on 47 influenza seasons and 94,821 participants. The live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) showed significant protection against mismatched (six RCTs, VE 54%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 28% to 71%) and matched (seven RCTs, VE 83%, 95% CI 75% to 88%) influenza strains among children aged 6 to 36 months. Differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 75%, 95% CI 41% to 90%) and mismatched influenza B (five RCTs, VE 42%, 95% CI 22% to 56%) estimates among children aged 6 to 36 months. The trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV) also afforded significant protection against mismatched (nine RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 37% to 63%) and matched (eight RCTs, VE 65%, 95% CI 54% to 73%) influenza strains among adults. Numerical differences were observed between the point estimates for mismatched influenza A (five RCTs, VE 64%, 95% CI 23% to 82%) and mismatched influenza B (eight RCTs, VE 52%, 95% CI 19% to 72%) estimates among adults. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I-2 < 50%) across all meta-analyses, except for the LAIV meta-analyses among children (I-2 = 79%). Conclusions: The TIV and LAIV vaccines can provide cross protection against non-matching circulating strains. The point estimates for VE were different for matching versus non-matching strains, with overlapping CIs.Canadian Institutes for Health Research/Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network New Investigator Award in Knowledge Synthesi

Inovasi Layanan Di UPT Perpustakaan Universitas Pasundan

The development of information and communication technologies have a positive impact and significant for the development of libraries. It will be realized when librarians wisely supported stakeholders to capture and utilize information and communication technologies in the management of an innovation in the Library. Innovation does not only provide a solution to the saturation in the works but also, raise the ratings of webometrics colleg

The final transformation of Étaín

Abstract Background Although serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists are effective in reducing nausea and vomiting, they may be associated with increased cardiac risk. Our objective was to examine the comparative safety and effectiveness of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (e.g., dolasetron, granisetron, ondansetron, palonosetron, tropisetron) alone or combined with steroids for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until December 2015 for studies comparing 5-HT3 receptor antagonists with each other or placebo in chemotherapy patients. The search results were screened, data were abstracted, and risk of bias was appraised by pairs of reviewers, independently. Random-effects meta-analyses and network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted. Results After screening 9226 citations and 970 full-text articles, we included 299 studies (n = 58,412 patients). None of the included studies reported harms for active treatment versus placebo. For NMAs on the risk of arrhythmia (primary outcome; three randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 627 adults) and mortality (secondary outcome; eight RCTs, 4823 adults), no statistically significant differences were observed between agents. A NMA on the risk of QTc prolongation showed a significantly greater risk for dolasetron + dexamethasone versus ondansetron + dexamethasone (four RCTs, 3358 children and adults, odds ratio 2.94, 95% confidence interval 2.13–4.17). For NMAs on the number of patients without nausea (44 RCTs, 11,664 adults, 12 treatments), number of patients without vomiting (63 RCTs, 15,460 adults, 12 treatments), and number of patients without chemotherapy-induced nausea or vomiting (27 RCTs, 10,924 adults, nine treatments), all agents were significantly superior to placebo. For a NMA on severe vomiting (10 RCTs, 917 adults), all treatments decreased the risk, but only ondansetron and ramosetron were significantly superior to placebo. According to a rank-heat plot with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve results, palonosetron + steroid was ranked the safest and most effective agent overall. Conclusions Most 5-HT3 receptor antagonists were relatively safe when compared with each other, yet none of the studies compared active treatment with placebo for harms. However, dolasetron + dexamethasone may prolong the QTc compared to ondansetron + dexamethasone. All agents were effective for reducing risk of nausea, vomiting, and chemotherapy-induced nausea or vomiting. Trial registration This study was registered at PROSPERO: ( CRD42013003564 )

Impact of H1N1 on Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Systematic Review

The burden of H1N1 among socially disadvantaged populations is unclear. We aimed to synthesize hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality data associated with pandemic A/H1N1/2009 among socially disadvantaged populations.Studies were identified through searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, scanning reference lists, and contacting experts. Studies reporting hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality attributable to laboratory-confirmed 2009 H1N1 pandemic among socially disadvantaged populations (e.g., ethnic minorities, low-income or lower-middle-income economy countries [LIC/LMIC]) were included. Two independent reviewers conducted screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal (Newcastle Ottawa Scale). Random effects meta-analysis was conducted using SAS and Review Manager.Sixty-two studies including 44,777 patients were included after screening 787 citations and 164 full-text articles. The prevalence of hospitalization for H1N1 ranged from 17-87% in high-income economy countries (HIC) and 11-45% in LIC/LMIC. Of those hospitalized, the prevalence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality was 6-76% and 1-25% in HIC; and 30% and 8-15%, in LIC/LMIC, respectively. There were significantly more hospitalizations among ethnic minorities versus non-ethnic minorities in two studies conducted in North America (1,313 patients, OR 2.26 [95% CI: 1.53-3.32]). There were no differences in ICU admissions (n = 8 studies, 15,352 patients, OR 0.84 [0.69-1.02]) or deaths (n = 6 studies, 14,757 patients, OR 0.85 [95% CI: 0.73-1.01]) among hospitalized patients in HIC. Sub-group analysis indicated that the meta-analysis results were not likely affected by confounding. Overall, the prevalence of hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality due to H1N1 was high for ethnic minorities in HIC and individuals from LIC/LMIC. However, our results suggest that there were little differences in the proportion of hospitalization, severe illness, and mortality between ethnic minorities and non-ethnic minorities living in HIC

Natural attack rate of influenza in unvaccinated children and adults: a meta-regression analysis

Abstract Background The natural (i.e. unvaccinated population) attack rate of an infectious disease is an important parameter required for understanding disease transmission. As such, it is an input parameter in infectious disease mathematical models. Influenza is an infectious disease that poses a major health concern worldwide and the natural attack rate of this disease is crucial in determining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of public health interventions and informing surveillance program design. We estimated age-stratified, strain-specific natural attack rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza in unvaccinated individuals. Methods Utilizing an existing systematic review, we calculated the attack rates in the trial placebo arms using a random effects model and a meta-regression analysis (GSK study identifier: 117102). Results This post-hoc analysis included 34 RCTs (Randomized Control Trials) contributing to 47 influenza seasons from 1970 to 2009. Meta-regression analyses showed that age and type of influenza were important covariates. The attack rates (95% CI (Confidence Interval)) in adults for all influenza, type A and type B were 3.50% (2.30%, 4.60%), 2.32% (1.47%, 3.17%) and 0.59% (0.28%, 0.91%) respectively. For children, they were 15.20% (11.40%, 18.90%), 12.27% (8.56%, 15.97%) and 5.50% (3.49%, 7.51%) respectively. Conclusions This analysis demonstrated that unvaccinated children have considerably higher exposure risk than adults and influenza A can cause more disease than influenza B. Moreover, a higher ratio of influenza B:A in children than adults was observed. This study provides a new, stratified and up to-date natural attack rates that can be used in influenza infectious disease models and are consistent with previous published work in the field

Conceptual recommendations for selecting the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer research questions related to complex evidence

Objective: To compare and contrast different knowledge synthesis methods and map their specific steps through a scoping review to gain a better understanding of how to select the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer research questions of complex evidence. Study design and setting: Electronic databases were searched to identify studies reporting emerging knowledge synthesis methods (e.g., Realist review) across multidisciplinary fields. Two reviewers independently selected studies and abstracted data for each article. Results: We synthesized diverse, often conflicting evidence to identify 12 unique knowledge synthesis methods and 13 analysis methods. We organized the 12 full knowledge synthesis methods according to their purpose, outputs and applicability for practice and policy, as well as general guidance on formulating the research question. To make sense of the overlap across these knowledge synthesis methods, we derived a conceptual algorithm to elucidate the process for selecting the optimal knowledge synthesis methods for particular research questions. Conclusion: These findings represent a preliminary understanding on which we will base further advancement of knowledge in this field. As part of next steps, we will convene a meeting of international leaders in the field aimed at clarifying emerging knowledge synthesis approaches.The study was funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR, grant number: ​KST-116633) Knowledge Synthesis grant. ACT holds a CIHR/Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network New Investigator Award in Knowledge Synthesis, and SES holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Translation. The authors thank Drs. Jeremy Grimshaw, David Moher, and Peter Tugwell, who provided support and expertise in knowledge synthesis methods and knowledge translation for our scoping review protocol. They also thank Drs. Vivian Welch and Tanya Horsley for their conceptualization of the scoping review; Erin Lillie, Judy Tran, and Laure Perrier for screening some citations, abstracting data, and analyzing the data; Peggy Robinson for copyediting the manuscript; and Ana Guzman for formatting the article. M.K. conceived the study, obtained funding for the study, screened citations and full-text articles, abstracted analyzed, and interpreted the data, and wrote this article. J.A. and C.S. coordinated the study, screened citations and full-text articles, abstracted data, developed the qualitative analysis, coded and analyzed data, and edited the article. S.E.S. conceived the study, obtained funding for the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, and edited the article. A.C.T. conceived the study, obtained funding for the study, screened citations and full text articles, abstracted data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and edited the article