An australian audit of vaccination status in children and adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Children and adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of vaccine preventable diseases (VPD). This includes invasive pneumococcal disease and influenza. The primary aim of this study was to describe compliance with current Australian guidelines for vaccination of children and adolescents diagnosed with IBD. A secondary aim was to review the serological screening for VPD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A random sample of patients (0-18 years at diagnosis), were selected from the Victoria Australia state based Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Register. A multi-faceted retrospective review of immunization status was undertaken, with hospital records audited, a telephone interview survey conducted with consenting parents and the vaccination history was checked against the primary care physician and Australian Childhood Immunization Register (ACIR) records. The routine primary childhood vaccinations and administration of the recommended additional influenza and pneumococcal vaccines was clarified.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>This 2007 audit reviewed the immunization status of 101individuals on the Victorian Pediatric IBD database. Median age at diagnosis was 12.1 years, 50% were on active immunosuppressive therapy. 90% (38/42) [95% confidence intervals (CI) 77%; 97%] with complete immunization information were up-to-date with routine primary immunizations. Only 5% (5/101) [95% CI 2%; 11%] received a recommended pneumococcal vaccine booster and 10% (10/101) [95% CI 5%; 17%] had evidence of having ever received a seasonal influenza vaccine. Those living in rural Victoria (p = 0.005) and younger at the age of diagnosis (p = 0.002) were more likely to have ever received an influenza vaccine Serological testing, reviewing historical protection from VPD, identified 18% (17/94) with evidence of at least one serology sample.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study highlights poor compliance in IBD patients for additional recommended vaccines. A multi-faceted approach is required to maximize protection from VPD in this vulnerable special risk population.</p

Therapy Insight: Parenteral Estrogen treatment for Prostate Cancer—a new dawn for an old therapy

Oral estrogens were the treatment of choice for carcinoma of the prostate for over four decades, but were abandoned because of an excess of cardiovascular and thromboembolic toxicity. It is now recognized that most of this toxicity is related to the first pass portal circulation, which upregulates the hepatic metabolism of hormones, lipids and coagulation proteins. Most of this toxicity can be avoided by parenteral (intramuscular or transdermal) estrogen administration, which avoids hepatic enzyme induction. It also seems that a short-term but modest increase in cardiovascular morbidity (but not mortality) is compensated for by a long-term cardioprotective benefit, which accrues progressively as vascular remodeling develops over time. Parenteral estrogen therapy has the advantage of giving protection against the effects of andropause (similar to the female menopause), which are induced by conventional androgen suppression and include osteoporotic fracture, hot flashes, asthenia and cognitive dysfunction. In addition, parenteral estrogen therapy is significantly cheaper than contemporary endocrine therapy, with substantive economic implications for health providers