Risk for Infection with Highly Pathogenic Influenza A Virus (H5N1) in Chickens, Hong Kong, 2002

Infection was spread to commercial poultry farms through retail marking of live birds

Vector autoregression, cointegration and causality: testing for causes of the British industrial revolution

The existence, timing, and possible causes of the British industrial revolution are considered by investigating the time series properties of industrial production and various explanatory variables. Utilising two types of robust cointegration-based causality tests we argue that domestic forces, notably technological progress, shaped the industrial revolution, whereas overseas trade expansion was mainly a consequence of industrial growth. Results from Granger-type VAR tests are contrasted with those of Toda and Phillips (Working paper 91-07, University of Western Australia, 1991b), where the latter manifest some of the potential problems raised by the authors when applied to a data set of this type. An understanding of the possible causes of the first industrial revolution may shed more general light on the forces promoting industrialization and growth. To the extent that the first industrial revolution offers a template, exports appear not to provide a simple pathway to industrialization.

Cognitive performance and neuropsychiatric symptoms in early, untreated Parkinson's disease

This study was undertaken to determine the prevalence and correlates of cognitive impairment (CI) and neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in early, untreated patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Background: Both CI and NPS are common in PD and impact disease course and quality of life. However, limited knowledge is available about cognitive abilities and NPS. Methods: Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) is a multi-site study of early, untreated PD patients and healthy controls (HCs), the latter with normal cognition. At baseline, participants were assessed with a neuropsychological battery and for symptoms of depression, anxiety, impulse control disorders (ICDs), psychosis, and apathy. Results: Baseline data of 423 PD patients and 196 HCs yielded no between-group differences in demographic characteristics. Twenty-two percent of PD patients met the PD-recommended screening cutoff for CI on the Montral Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), but only 9% met detailed neuropsychological testing criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI)-level impairment. The PD patients were more depressed than HCs (P<0.001), with twice as many (14% vs. 7%) meeting criteria for clinically significant depressive symptoms. The PD patients also experienced more anxiety (P<0.001) and apathy (P<0.001) than HCs. Psychosis was uncommon in PD (3%), and no between-group difference was seen in ICD symptoms (P=0.51). Conclusions: Approximately 10% of PD patients in the early, untreated disease state met traditional criteria of CI, which is a lower frequency compared with previous studies. Multiple dopaminergic-dependent NPS are also more common in these patients compared with the general population, but others associated with dopamine replacement therapy are not or are rare. Future analyses of this cohort will examine biological predictors and the course of CI and NPS

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health