Seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus, Epstein Barr virus and varicella zoster virus among pregnant women in Bradford: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein Barr virus (EBV) and varicella zoster virus (VZV) among pregnant women in Bradford by ethnic group and country of birth. METHODS: A stratified random sample of 949 pregnant women enrolled in the Born in Bradford birth cohort was selected to ensure sufficient numbers of White UK born women, Asian UK born women and Asian women born in Asia. Serum samples taken at 24-28 weeks' gestation were tested for CMV IgG, EBV IgG and VZV IgG. Each woman completed a questionnaire which included socio-demographic information. RESULTS: CMV seroprevalence was 49% among the White British women, 89% among South Asian UK born women and 98% among South Asian women born in South Asia. These differences remained after adjusting for socio-demographic factors. In contrast, VZV seroprevalence was 95% among women born in the UK but significantly lower at 90% among South Asian women born in Asia. EBV seroprevalence was 94% overall and did not vary by ethnic group/country of birth. CONCLUSIONS: Although about half of White British women are at risk of primary CMV infection in pregnancy and the associated increased risk of congenital infection, most congenital CMV infections are likely to be in children born to South Asian women with non-primary infection during pregnancy. South Asian women born in South Asia are at risk of VZV infection during pregnancy which could produce congenital varicella syndrome or perinatal chickenpox. Differences in CMV and VZV seroprevalence by ethnic group and country of birth must be taken into account when universal immunisation against these viruses is contemplated

Socio-demographic variables by ethnic group/country of birth category.

<p>Socio-demographic variables by ethnic group/country of birth category.</p

Association of ethnic group/country of birth category and CMV seropositivity (n=949).

<p>Association of ethnic group/country of birth category and CMV seropositivity (n=949).</p

Seroprevalence of CMV, EBV and VZV by ethnic group/country of birth category and other socio-demographic variables.

*<p>p values are for design-based F statistic (test of association between socio-demographic variables and seroprevalence allowing for stratified sampling design)</p

Association of ethnic group/country of birth category and VZV seropositivity (n=942).

<p>Association of ethnic group/country of birth category and VZV seropositivity (n=942).</p

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used