Journal Article > ResearchAbstract Only
J Travel Med. 2021 June 15; Online ahead of print; taab086.; DOI:10.1093/jtm/taab086
Carnino L, Vetter P, Peyraud N, Aebischer-Perone S, Chappuis F, et al.
J Travel Med. 2021 June 15; Online ahead of print; taab086.; DOI:10.1093/jtm/taab086
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
Geneva University Hospitals were granted a temporary authorization to administer the recombinant live vesicular stomatitis virus rVSV-ZEBOV (Ervebo®) vaccine to expatriate humanitarian frontline workers (FLWs) prior to mission deployment.
OBJECTIVE
Our aims were to assess the feasibility of FLW vaccination before deployment and to report adverse events (AEs).
METHODS
FLWs received a single injection of rVSV-ZEBOV (>7.2E7 plaque forming unit) during their pre-deployment medical check-up at the Travel Medicine Clinic of the Geneva University Hospitals (Day 0). A safety questionnaire regarding potential AEs was emailed to FLWs on Days 3 and 21. Early and delayed AEs were those starting within 3 or 21 days of vaccination, respectively.
RESULTS
Between 1 August 2019 and 30 June 2020, 124 FLWs received the rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine. Eighty-six volunteers (86/124; 69%) received a concomitant vaccine. The response rate to the follow-up questionnaire was 88 and 55% at Days 3 and 21, respectively. Most respondents (105/109; 96.3%), experienced at least one AE, with a mean of three (±SD 1.75) AEs per person. The most common AE was injection site pain, followed by fever (53/109; 48.6%), fatigue (51/109; 46.7%) and myalgia (49/109; 44.9%). Most early AEs (360/377; 95.4%) resolved within 3 days, reflecting vaccine reactogenicity. Delayed AEs were reported by 6/69 (7.2%) subjects, the median time to symptom onset was 11 days (range: 5-14); half of them were joint-related AEs (3/6). Four serious adverse events (SAE) were observed: two cases of high grade fever, one rash and one case of arthritis. Two suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions were observed: one case of continuing recurrent transient dizziness and fatigue considered related to the vaccine; and one case of presbyopia that was deemed unrelated.
CONCLUSION
AEs to rVSV-ZEBOV were common but in general transient and were well tolerated, pre-deployment rVSV-ZEBOV vaccination in FLW is feasible and can be included with pre-mission check-up.
Geneva University Hospitals were granted a temporary authorization to administer the recombinant live vesicular stomatitis virus rVSV-ZEBOV (Ervebo®) vaccine to expatriate humanitarian frontline workers (FLWs) prior to mission deployment.
OBJECTIVE
Our aims were to assess the feasibility of FLW vaccination before deployment and to report adverse events (AEs).
METHODS
FLWs received a single injection of rVSV-ZEBOV (>7.2E7 plaque forming unit) during their pre-deployment medical check-up at the Travel Medicine Clinic of the Geneva University Hospitals (Day 0). A safety questionnaire regarding potential AEs was emailed to FLWs on Days 3 and 21. Early and delayed AEs were those starting within 3 or 21 days of vaccination, respectively.
RESULTS
Between 1 August 2019 and 30 June 2020, 124 FLWs received the rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine. Eighty-six volunteers (86/124; 69%) received a concomitant vaccine. The response rate to the follow-up questionnaire was 88 and 55% at Days 3 and 21, respectively. Most respondents (105/109; 96.3%), experienced at least one AE, with a mean of three (±SD 1.75) AEs per person. The most common AE was injection site pain, followed by fever (53/109; 48.6%), fatigue (51/109; 46.7%) and myalgia (49/109; 44.9%). Most early AEs (360/377; 95.4%) resolved within 3 days, reflecting vaccine reactogenicity. Delayed AEs were reported by 6/69 (7.2%) subjects, the median time to symptom onset was 11 days (range: 5-14); half of them were joint-related AEs (3/6). Four serious adverse events (SAE) were observed: two cases of high grade fever, one rash and one case of arthritis. Two suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions were observed: one case of continuing recurrent transient dizziness and fatigue considered related to the vaccine; and one case of presbyopia that was deemed unrelated.
CONCLUSION
AEs to rVSV-ZEBOV were common but in general transient and were well tolerated, pre-deployment rVSV-ZEBOV vaccination in FLW is feasible and can be included with pre-mission check-up.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS Med. 2008 July 8; Volume 5 (Issue 7); DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050148
Keiser O, Orrell C, Egger M, Wood R, Brinkhof MW, et al.
PLOS Med. 2008 July 8; Volume 5 (Issue 7); DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050148
BACKGROUND: The provision of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in resource-limited settings follows a public health approach, which is characterised by a limited number of regimens and the standardisation of clinical and laboratory monitoring. In industrialized countries doctors prescribe from the full range of available antiretroviral drugs, supported by resistance testing and frequent laboratory monitoring. We compared virologic response, changes to first-line regimens, and mortality in HIV-infected patients starting HAART in South Africa and Switzerland. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analysed data from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study and two HAART programmes in townships of Cape Town, South Africa. We included treatment-naïve patients aged 16 y or older who had started treatment with at least three drugs since 2001, and excluded intravenous drug users. Data from a total of 2,348 patients from South Africa and 1,016 patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study were analysed. Median baseline CD4+ T cell counts were 80 cells/mul in South Africa and 204 cells/mul in Switzerland. In South Africa, patients started with one of four first-line regimens, which was subsequently changed in 514 patients (22%). In Switzerland, 36 first-line regimens were used initially, and these were changed in 539 patients (53%). In most patients HIV-1 RNA was suppressed to 500 copies/ml or less within one year: 96% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95%-97%) in South Africa and 96% (94%-97%) in Switzerland, and 26% (22%-29%) and 27% (24%-31%), respectively, developed viral rebound within two years. Mortality was higher in South Africa than in Switzerland during the first months of HAART: adjusted hazard ratios were 5.90 (95% CI 1.81-19.2) during months 1-3 and 1.77 (0.90-3.50) during months 4-24. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the highly individualised approach in Switzerland, programmatic HAART in South Africa resulted in similar virologic outcomes, with relatively few changes to initial regimens. Further innovation and resources are required in South Africa to both achieve more timely access to HAART and improve the prognosis of patients who start HAART with advanced disease.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018 September 20; Volume 7 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1186/s13756-018-0403-4
Abbas M, Aloudat T, Bartolomei J, Carballo M, Durieux-Paillard S, et al.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018 September 20; Volume 7 (Issue 1); DOI:10.1186/s13756-018-0403-4
The 2015-2017 global migratory crisis saw unprecedented numbers of people on the move and tremendous diversity in terms of age, gender and medical requirements. This article focuses on key emerging public health issues around migrant populations and their interactions with host populations. Basic needs and rights of migrants and refugees are not always respected in regard to article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 23 of the Refugee Convention. These are populations with varying degrees of vulnerability and needs in terms of protection, security, rights, and access to healthcare. Their health status, initially conditioned by the situation at the point of origin, is often jeopardised by adverse conditions along migratory paths and in intermediate and final destination countries. Due to their condition, forcibly displaced migrants and refugees face a triple burden of non-communicable diseases, infectious diseases, and mental health issues. There are specific challenges regarding chronic infectious and neglected tropical diseases, for which awareness in host countries is imperative. Health risks in terms of susceptibility to, and dissemination of, infectious diseases are not unidirectional. The response, including the humanitarian effort, whose aim is to guarantee access to basic needs (food, water and sanitation, healthcare), is gripped with numerous challenges. Evaluation of current policy shows insufficiency regarding the provision of basic needs to migrant populations, even in the countries that do the most. Governments around the world need to rise to the occasion and adopt policies that guarantee universal health coverage, for migrants and refugees, as well as host populations, in accordance with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. An expert consultation was carried out in the form of a pre-conference workshop during the 4th International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) in Geneva, Switzerland, on 20 June 2017, the United Nations World Refugee Day.
Journal Article > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2012 February 8; Volume 16 (Issue 4); DOI:10.5588/ijtld.11.0451
Cox HS, Ford NP
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2012 February 8; Volume 16 (Issue 4); DOI:10.5588/ijtld.11.0451
BACKGROUND: Current treatment for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) is inadequate, and outcomes are significantly poorer than for drug-susceptible TB, particularly for patients previously treated with second-line drugs, treatment failures or extensively drug-resistant (XDR-) TB patients (complicated DR-TB). Linezolid is not recommended for routine DR-TB treatment due to the lack of efficacy data, but is suggested for patients where adequate second-line regimens are difficult to design.OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and metaanalysis to assess existing evidence of efficacy and safety of linezolid for DR-TB treatment.METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase and abstracts from World Conferences of The Union for studies published through February 2011. We included all studies in which linezolid was given systematically to DR-TB patients and where treatment outcomes were reported.RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included in our review, representing 148 patients. The pooled proportion for treatment success was 67.99% (95%CI 58.00-78.99, τ2 129.42). There were no significant differences in success comparing daily linezolid dose (≤600 vs. >600 mg) and mean linezolid duration (≤7 vs. >7 months). The pooled estimate for the frequency of any adverse events was 61.48% (95%CI 40.15-82.80), with 36.23% (95%CI 20.67-51.79) discontinuing linezolid due to adverse events.CONCLUSION: Treatment success with linezolid was equal to or better than that commonly achieved for uncomplicated DR-TB, and better than previous reports for previously treated patients and those with XDR-TB. While data are limited, linezolid appears be a useful drug, albeit associated with significant adverse events, and should be considered in the treatment of complicated DR-TB.
Journal Article > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
PLOS One. 2013 February 5; Volume 8 (Issue 2); DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0055373
Davies A, Singh K, du Cros PAK, Mills EJ, Cooke GS, et al.
PLOS One. 2013 February 5; Volume 8 (Issue 2); DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0055373