Examining the Prevalence of Self-Reported Respiratory Symptoms and Respiratory Infection amongst Firefighters in the Presence or Absence of Asthma

BACKGROUND: Firefighters are exposed to numerous chemicals, fumes, and particulate matter on a regular basis. Current research shows a notable correlation between the number of years exposed to these chemicals, and the presence of respiratory related symptoms in firefighters. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine if a significant positive correlation exists between the number of years in service as a firefighter and the development of respiratory symptoms. METHODS: An online survey utilizing the St. George’s Respiratory Survey was used to determine if there is a positive correlation between the number of years a fireman has served and the frequency of developed respiratory symptoms. Respiratory symptoms listed in the survey included coughing, shortness of breath, sputum production, and wheezing. Telephone, email, and Facebook were used to recruit fire departments within a large southern metropolitan area. Both active and retired firemen were included in the study. Inferential statistical tests included a Spearman’s correlation test and Whitney-Mann U test to determine if an association existed between years of service, respiratory symptoms, use of respirators and respiratory symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 43 surveys were completed and recorded. Among all respondents, 88% (N = 38) of were male, 4.7% (N = 2) were female, and 7.0% (N = 3) were unidentified. 48.8% (N = 21) of participants were between the ages of 45-54 years, 32.6% (N = 14) were 35-44 years, 4.7% (N = 2) were 25-34 years and 18-24 years, respectively, and 7.0% (N = 3) accounted for unidentified age. Spearman’s correlation test for a computed score of respiratory symptoms (M 2.74, STD ± 2.85) was p = 0.81, suggesting no significance in correlation for the presence of respiratory symptoms. In addition, a Spearman’s test was used to examen each of the symptoms individually, those results indicated no significant correlation between number of years in service and the presence and frequency of respiratory symptoms (coughing r = 0.014, p = 0.93, phlegm production r = 0.030, p = 0.856, shortness of breath r = 0.007, p = 0.97, and wheezing r = 0.099, p = 0.549). Wheezing showed the most significant results but had a weak positive correlation (r = 0.099 p = 0.549) with the number of years in service. This could suggest an existing correlation between certain respiratory symptoms and the line of work involved in a full-time fireman; however, more research is needed to support this conclusion. Examining the correlation between the use of respirators and respiratory symptoms, a Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine the prevalence in respiratory symptoms in those that used a respirator and those that did not (“YES” N = 28, “NO” N = 11, and N/A N = 4). Results showed no significant relationship between those that use and do not use a respirator and developed respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: The study findings support the conclusion that developed respiratory symptoms are idiopathic in nature. More research is needed to further determine the source of respiratory symptoms, particularly in those involved with fumes, chemicals, and particulate matter

Idarubicin dose escalation during consolidation therapy for adult acute myeloid leukemia

Purpose Higher doses of the anthracycline daunorubicin during induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have been shown to improve remission rates and survival. We hypothesized that improvements in outcomes in adult AML may be further achieved by increased anthracycline dose during consolidation therapy. Patients and Methods Patients with AML in complete remission after induction therapy were randomly assigned to receive two cycles of consolidation therapy with cytarabine 100 mg/m daily for 5 days, etoposide 75 mg/m daily for 5 days, and idarubicin 9 mg/m daily for either 2 or 3 days (standard and intensive arms, respectively). The primary end point was leukemia-free survival (LFS). Results Two hundred ninety-three patients 16 to 60 years of age, excluding those with core binding factor AML and acute promyelocytic leukemia, were randomly assigned to treatment groups (146 to the standard arm and 147 to the intensive arm). Both groups were balanced for age, karyotypic risk, and FLT3–internal tandem duplication and NPM1 gene mutations. One hundred twenty patients in the standard arm (82%) and 95 patients in the intensive arm (65%) completed planned consolidation (P, .001). Durations of severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were prolonged in the intensive arm, but there were no differences in serious nonhematological toxicities. With a median follow-up of 5.3 years (range, 0.6 to 9.9 years), there was a statistically significant improvement in LFS in the intensive arm compared with the standard arm (3-year LFS, 47% [95% CI, 40% to 56%] v 35% [95% CI, 28% to 44%]; P = .045). At 5 years, the overall survival rate was 57% in the intensive arm and 47% in the standard arm (P = .092). There was no evidence of selective benefit of intensive consolidation within the cytogenetic or FLT3–internal tandem duplication and NPM1 gene mutation subgroups. Conclusion An increased cumulative dose of idarubicin during consolidation therapy for adult AML resulted in improved LFS, without increased nonhematologic toxicity

Assessment of a two-step nucleic acid amplification assay for detection of Neisseria meningitidis followed by capsular genogrouping

Immediate prevention of meningococcal disease relies in part on the prompt treatment with antibiotics of household and other close contacts of cases; however intervention with effective vaccination relies on identification of serogroup-causing strains. Parenteral antibiotic for patient with suspected meningococcal disease before hospital admission is currently recommended. Laboratory standard methods are hindered by failure to detect bacteria by this medical approach to improve patient prognosis. We assessed two polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays to detect (crgA) and define the serogroups (siaD, orf-2, and ctrA) of Neisseria meningitidis in 120 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from positive cases (culture or antigen detection or direct smear). The PCR sensitivity for the identification of N. meningitidis was 100% (95% confidence interval, CI, 96-100%) compared to a sensitivity of 46% for culture (95% CI 37-55%), 61% for latex agglutination test (95% CI 52-70%), and 68% for Gram stain (95% CI 59-76%); PCR specificity was 97% (95% CI 82-100%). PCR correctly identified the serogroups A, B, C, W135, Y, and X in CSF samples with a sensitivity of 88% (95% CI 80-93%); the primer sets were 100% specific. The introduction of PCR-based assays shall increase laboratory confirmed cases, consequently enhancing surveillance of meningococcal disease

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI) : a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor. Methods: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population). Findings: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8–3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74–0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, p interaction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78–1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75–1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48–2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36–3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74–1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75–0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, p interaction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI. Interpretation: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk

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