COVID-19 and other adult vaccines can drive global disease prevention
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Agus D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9612846 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AbbreviationsCOVID-19: Coronavirus disease 2019; SARS-CoV-2: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; VLPs: Virus like particles; WHO: World Health Organization; E: Envelope; M: Membrane; S: Spike; N: Nucleocapsid; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; LNP: lipid-nanoparticle; AZD1222: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19; BNT162b2: Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine; mRNA-1273: Moderna vaccine; Ad26.COV2.S: Johnson and Johnson - Janssen's vaccine; Gam-COVID-Vac: Sputnik Vaccine; NVX-CoV2373: Novavax vaccine with Matrix-M™ adjuvant.
| S-EPMC10101659 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8078890 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8409906 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7869766 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Screening programs have been associated with a substantial reduction in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality through endoscopic resection of preneoplastic lesions and detection of early-stage invasive cancers.
In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared as a pandemic the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2. Since then, the SARS-CoV-2 have never stopped spreading, causing an unprecedented situation with highly restrictive considerations to be adopted by the majority of countries worldwide.
Health-care facilities have been making an enormous effort to assist patients affected by COVID-19, while adopting measures to maintain a safe environment for patients and healthcare professionals. As a result, the usual workflow in endoscopy departments changed dramatically, leading to an increase in cancelled procedures, probably increasing the future burden of Colorectal Cancer due to delays in diagnosis.
| 2358399 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BackgroundEstimates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness under real-world conditions, and understanding of barriers to uptake, are necessary to inform vaccine rollout.MethodsWe enrolled cases (testing positive) and controls (testing negative) from among the population whose SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic test results from 24 February to 29 April 2021 were reported to the California Department of Public Health. Participants were matched on age, sex, and geographic region. We assessed participants' self-reported history of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine receipt (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). Participants were considered fully vaccinated 2 weeks after second dose receipt. Among unvaccinated participants, we assessed willingness to receive vaccination. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) via the matched odds ratio of prior vaccination, comparing cases with controls.ResultsWe enrolled 1023 eligible participants aged ≥18 years. Among 525 cases, 71 (13.5%) received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; 20 (3.8%) were fully vaccinated with either product. Among 498 controls, 185 (37.1%) received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; 86 (16.3%) were fully vaccinated with either product. Two weeks after second dose receipt, VE was 87.0% (95% confidence interval: 68.6-94.6%) and 86.2% (68.4-93.9%) for BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively. Fully vaccinated participants receiving either product experienced 91.3% (79.3-96.3%) and 68.3% (27.9-85.7%) VE against symptomatic and asymptomatic infection, respectively. Among unvaccinated participants, 42.4% (159/375) residing in rural regions and 23.8% (67/281) residing in urban regions reported hesitancy to receive COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsAuthorized mRNA-based vaccines are effective at reducing documented SARS-CoV-2 infections within the general population of California. Vaccine hesitancy presents a barrier to reaching coverage levels needed for herd immunity.
| S-EPMC8406879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdults who are hesitant toward routinely recommended vaccines for adults may also be hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccines. However, the distribution and differences in hesitancy between routinely recommended vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines, and the association of hesitancy regarding routinely recommended vaccines and hesitancy with COVID-19 vaccination status and intent, is unknown.MethodsUsing the Research and Development Survey (RANDS) during COVID-19, Round 3, a probability-sampled, nationally representative, web and phone survey fielded from May 17 - June 30, 2021 (n = 5,434), we examined the distribution and difference in prevalence of hesitancy towards COVID-19 and vaccines in general, beliefs associated with vaccine hesitancy, and factors impacting plans to be vaccinated against COVID-19.ResultsReported hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines (42.2%) was 6-percentage points higher than hesitancy towards vaccines in general (35.7%). Populations who were most hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccines were younger adults, non-Hispanic Black adults, adults with lower education or income, and adults who were associated with a religion. Beliefs in the social benefit and the importance of vaccination, and the belief that COVID-19 vaccines lower risk for infection, were strongly associated with COVID-19 vaccination and intent to be vaccinated.ConclusionsVaccine hesitancy for both COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general is common. Health providers and public health officials should utilize strategies to address vaccine hesitancy, including providing strong clear recommendations for needed vaccines, addressing safety and effectiveness concerns, and utilizing trusted messengers such as religious and community leaders to improve vaccine confidence.
| S-EPMC11925216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the trustworthiness of information sources, perception of clear information about the vaccine, and strategies to increase adherence to vaccination to provide managers with information that helps establish effective communication with the population about vaccination.MethodThis is an online survey conducted between January 22 and 29, 2021, preceded by an Informed Consent, that aims to assess vaccine hesitancy, which corresponded to the first week of vaccination initiation to prevent COVID-19 in Brazil. Data were obtained from a questionnaire made available through a free platform and stored in Google Forms and later exported to the SPSS statistical package for analysis. The sample consisted of all questionnaires from participants who self-declared as age 18 or older, Brazilian, and residing in Brazil at the time of the survey. Incomplete records with more than 50% of blank items and duplicates were excluded. All categorical variables were analyzed from their absolute and relative frequencies. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to verify the relationship between dependent variables and independent variables.ResultsThe results show that trust in information sources diverges between hesitant and non-hesitant. They also showed that some participants show an overall distrust that seems to have deeper foundations than issues related only to the source of information. The high rejection of television and the WHO as sources of information among hesitant suggests that integrated actions with research institutes, public figures vaccinating, and religious leaders can help to combat vaccine hesitation. Two actors become particularly important in this dynamic, both for good and bad, and their anti-vaxxer behavior must be observed: the doctor and the Ministry of Health.ConclusionThis study contributes to gathering valuable information to help understand the behavior and thinking relevant to the adherence to vaccination recommendations.
| S-EPMC9810184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInformation is limited regarding the effectiveness of the two-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) in preventing infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and in attenuating coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) when administered in real-world conditions.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study involving 3975 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers. From December 14, 2020, to April 10, 2021, the participants completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing by providing mid-turbinate nasal swabs for qualitative and quantitative reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) analysis. The formula for calculating vaccine effectiveness was 100% × (1 - hazard ratio for SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated participants), with adjustments for the propensity to be vaccinated, study site, occupation, and local viral circulation.ResultsSARS-CoV-2 was detected in 204 participants (5%), of whom 5 were fully vaccinated (≥14 days after dose 2), 11 partially vaccinated (≥14 days after dose 1 and <14 days after dose 2), and 156 unvaccinated; the 32 participants with indeterminate vaccination status (<14 days after dose 1) were excluded. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76 to 97) with full vaccination and 81% (95% CI, 64 to 90) with partial vaccination. Among participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the mean viral RNA load was 40% lower (95% CI, 16 to 57) in partially or fully vaccinated participants than in unvaccinated participants. In addition, the risk of febrile symptoms was 58% lower (relative risk, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.98) and the duration of illness was shorter, with 2.3 fewer days spent sick in bed (95% CI, 0.8 to 3.7).ConclusionsAuthorized mRNA vaccines were highly effective among working-age adults in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection when administered in real-world conditions, and the vaccines attenuated the viral RNA load, risk of febrile symptoms, and duration of illness among those who had breakthrough infection despite vaccination. (Funded by the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
| S-EPMC8262622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The uncertainty related to prevention and treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 due to lack of effective vaccine candidates or drug molecules has resulted in extensive spread of infection and mortality worldwide. Although the asymptomatic or mild patients are becoming healthy with regular over-the-counter medicines and proper rest and care, for the severe patients, in the absence of definite cure, different drug combinations are being used to treat on trial basis without the assurance of efficacy and safety. This scenario has however changed now with some medicines including antiviral Remdesivir and Favipiravir and anti-inflammatory drugs like dexamethasone and tocilizumab which have shown some positive results in trials such as decreasing need of mechanical or non-invasive ventilation or mortality. Further, a number of vaccine candidates are currently in pipeline and in advance stages of clinical trials, which will enhance their prospects in determining how the disease will be controlled in the times to come. In this article, an account of the under-trial potential drugs and vaccine candidates has been provided, and their future prospects have been discussed.
| S-EPMC7984501 | biostudies-literature