19 research outputs found

    Factors Affecting Implementation of an Evidence-Based Practice in the VA: Illness Management and Recovery

    Get PDF
    Objective: Illness management and recovery (IMR) is an evidence-based practice that assists consumers in managing their illnesses and pursuing personal recovery goals. Although research has examined factors affecting IMR implementation facilitated by multifaceted, active roll-outs, the current study attempted to elucidate factors affecting IMR implementation outside the context of a research-driven implementation. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 20 local recovery coordinators and 18 local IMR experts were conducted at 23 VA medical centers. Interviews examined perceived and experienced barriers and facilitators to IMR implementation. Data were analyzed via thematic inductive/deductive analysis in the form of crystallization/immersion. Results: Six factors differed between sites implementing IMR from those not providing IMR: awareness of IMR, importer-champions, autonomy-supporting leadership, veteran-centered care, presence of a sensitive period, and presence of a psychosocial rehabilitation and recovery center. Four factors were common in both groups: recovery orientation, evidence-based practices orientation, perceived IMR fit within program structure, and availability of staff time. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: IMR can be adopted in lieu of active implementation support; however, knowledge dissemination appears to be key. Future research should examine factors affecting the quality of implementation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved

    Cytomegaloviral determinants of CD8+ T cell programming and RhCMV/SIV vaccine efficacy

    Get PDF
    Simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) insert-expressing, 68–1 Rhesus Cytomegalovirus (RhCMV/SIV) vectors elicit major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-E- and -II-restricted, SIV-specific CD8(+) T cell responses, but the basis of these unconventional responses and their contribution to demonstrated vaccine efficacy against SIV challenge in the rhesus monkeys (RMs) has not been characterized. We show that these unconventional responses resulted from a chance genetic rearrangement in 68–1 RhCMV that abrogated the function of eight distinct immunomodulatory gene products encoded in two RhCMV genomic regions (Rh157.5/Rh157.4 and Rh158–161), revealing three patterns of unconventional response inhibition. Differential repair of these genes with either RhCMV-derived or orthologous human CMV (HCMV)-derived sequences (UL128/UL130; UL146/UL147) leads to either of two distinct CD8(+) T cell response types – MHC-Ia-restricted-only, or a mix of MHC-II- and MHC-Ia-restricted CD8(+) T cells. Response magnitude and functional differentiation are similar to RhCMV 68–1, but neither alternative response type mediated protection against SIV challenge. These findings implicate MHC-E-restricted CD8(+) T cell responses as mediators of anti-SIV efficacy and indicate that translation of RhCMV/SIV vector efficacy to humans will likely require deletion of all genes that inhibit these responses from the HCMV/HIV vector

    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.

    Get PDF
    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. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

    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

    Get PDF
    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

    Impact of Belimumab on Organ Damage in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

    No full text
    Organ damage is a key determinant of poor long-term prognosis and early death in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Prevention of damage is a key treatment goal of the 2019 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for SLE management. Belimumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) and is the only therapy approved for both SLE and lupus nephritis. Here, we review the clinical trial and real-world data on the effects of belimumab on organ damage in adult patients with SLE. Across 4 phase III studies, belimumab in combination with background SLE therapy demonstrated consistent reductions in key drivers of organ damage including disease activity, risk of new severe flares, and glucocorticoid exposure compared to background therapy alone. Long-term belimumab use in SLE also reduced organ damage progression measured by the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index, as reported in open-label extension studies, and propensity score–matched comparative analyses to background therapy alone. Results from a clinical trial showed that in patients with active lupus nephritis, belimumab treatment improved renal response, reduced the risk of renal-related events, and impacted features related to kidney damage progression compared to background therapy alone. The decrease of organ damage accumulation observed with belimumab treatment in SLE, including lupus nephritis, suggest a disease-modifying effect

    Impact of Belimumab on Organ Damage in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

    No full text
    Organ damage is a key determinant of poor long-term prognosis and early death in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Prevention of damage is a key treatment goal of the 2019 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for SLE management. Belimumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) and is the only therapy approved for both SLE and lupus nephritis. Here, we review the clinical trial and real-world data on the effects of belimumab on organ damage in adult patients with SLE. Across 4 phase III studies, belimumab in combination with background SLE therapy demonstrated consistent reductions in key drivers of organ damage including disease activity, risk of new severe flares, and glucocorticoid exposure compared to background therapy alone. Long-term belimumab use in SLE also reduced organ damage progression measured by the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index, as reported in open-label extension studies, and propensity score–matched comparative analyses to background therapy alone. Results from a clinical trial showed that in patients with active lupus nephritis, belimumab treatment improved renal response, reduced the risk of renal-related events, and impacted features related to kidney damage progression compared to background therapy alone. The decrease of organ damage accumulation observed with belimumab treatment in SLE, including lupus nephritis, suggest a disease-modifying effect
    corecore