1
|
de Oliveira Gomes J, Gagliardi AM, Andriolo BN, Torloni MR, Andriolo RB, Puga MEDS, Canteiro Cruz E. Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 10:CD008858. [PMID: 37781954 PMCID: PMC10542961 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008858.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of ageing is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older adults to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. Two types of herpes zoster vaccines are currently available. One of them is the single-dose live attenuated zoster vaccine (LZV), which contains the same live attenuated virus used in the chickenpox vaccine, but it has over 14-fold more plaque-forming units of the attenuated virus per dose. The other is the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) which does not contain the live attenuated virus, but rather a small fraction of the virus that cannot replicate but can boost immunogenicity. The recommended schedule for the RZV is two doses two months apart. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010, and updated in 2012, 2016, and 2019. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults. SEARCH METHODS For this 2022 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1948 to October 2022), Embase (2010 to October 2022), CINAHL (1981 to October 2022), LILACS (1982 to October 2022), and three trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included studies involving healthy older adults (mean age 60 years or older). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were cumulative incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included two new studies involving 1736 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 26 studies involving 90,259 healthy older adults with a mean age of 63.7 years. Only three studies assessed the cumulative incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan and one study was conducted in the Republic of Korea. Sixteen studies used LZV. Ten studies tested an RZV. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate, which indicates that the intervention probably works. Most data for the primary outcome (cumulative incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years of follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-certainty evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6; moderate-certainty evidence) of mild to moderate intensity. These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or older. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-certainty evidence), probably indicating a favourable profile of the intervention. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that their symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV (single dose) and RZV (two doses) are probably effective in preventing shingles disease for at least three years. To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity. The conclusions did not change in relation to the previous version of the systematic review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anna Mz Gagliardi
- Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Brenda Ng Andriolo
- Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Maria Regina Torloni
- Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Regis B Andriolo
- Department of Public Health, Universidade do Estado do Pará, Belém, Brazil
| | - Maria Eduarda Dos Santos Puga
- Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Eduardo Canteiro Cruz
- Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dore RK, Antonova JN, Burudpakdee C, Chang L, Gorritz M, Genovese MC. The Incidence, Prevalence, and Associated Costs of Anemia, Malignancy, Venous Thromboembolism, Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, and Infections in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients by Treatment History in the United States. ACR Open Rheumatol 2021; 4:473-482. [PMID: 34792867 PMCID: PMC9190226 DOI: 10.1002/acr2.11376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2021] [Revised: 07/22/2021] [Accepted: 07/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can influence treatment selection, impact treatment persistency, and increase health care costs. This study assessed the magnitude of comorbidity burden via epidemiology (incidence and prevalence) and associated costs of select comorbidities in RA patients: anemia, malignancy, venous thromboembolism (VTE), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and infections, stratified by history of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) exposure. METHODS From the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database, we selected adult patients with RA (2 or more RA diagnostic codes at least 30 days apart) at initiation of a new DMARD (DMARD-naïve), after the first conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) or after the first biologic DMARD (bDMARD). We assessed pre-index prevalence (percentage) and on-treatment incidence (per 100 patient-years [P100PY]) of the aforementioned comorbidities. For patients with versus without incident conditions, we compared total all-cause health care costs as unadjusted and adjusted for baseline characteristics and health care costs. RESULTS Prior to initiating a new treatment, among DMARD-naïve patients (N = 28,201), csDMARD switchers (N = 7,816), or bDMARD switchers (N = 4,656), the overall prevalence ranged from 14.1% to 16.2% (anemia), from 1.3% to 5.2% (malignancy, evaluated in csDMARD and bDMARD switchers), from 1.5% to 2.1% (VTE), from 1.8% to 2.9% (MACE), and from 66.6% to 76.1% (infections). Once on index treatment, overall incidence (P100PY) among the cohorts ranged from 6.9 to 8.9 (anemia), from 2.0 to 2.3 (malignancy), from 0.7 to 0.9 (VTE), from 1.6 to 2.0 (MACE), and from 77.4 to 87.7 (infections). The incident comorbidities (except herpes zoster) were associated with increased adjusted health care costs. CONCLUSION Anemia, malignancy, VTE, MACE, and infections affect patients with RA at all stages of their treatment journey and are associated with increased health care costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Mark C Genovese
- Gilead Sciences, Foster City, California.,Division of Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Racine É, Gilca V, Amini R, Tunis M, Ismail S, Sauvageau C. A systematic literature review of the recombinant subunit herpes zoster vaccine use in immunocompromised 18-49 year old patients. Vaccine 2020; 38:6205-6214. [PMID: 32788132 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.07.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2020] [Revised: 06/29/2020] [Accepted: 07/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is indicated for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in adults aged ≥50 years. Questions regarding the use of RZV in immunocompromised patients < 50-year-old, who are at increased risk for HZ, were raised. OBJECTIVES The objective of this systematic review was to consolidate existing evidences on safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of RZV in immunocompromised adults aged 18-49 years. METHODS Four databases were searched. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines were followed. Screening and classification of search items was performed using the web-based platform DistillerSR. RESULTS The search identified 1389 potentially relevant records. Six studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. The proportion of patients aged 18-49 varied between 23 and 62%. Pain at injection site (98.6%) and fatigue (75.3%) were the most common adverse events. The proportion of patients reporting serious adverse events (SAEs) ranged between 8.1 and 30.8% in RZV and between 4.1 and 36.5% in placebo groups. SAEs deemed related to vaccination were reported in < 1% of patients in both RZV and placebo groups. The proportion of patients that experienced clinically significant underlying disease-related events ranged between 0.0 and 20.0% in RZV and 0.0 and 26.7% in placebo groups. The humoral and cell-mediated immune response rate ranged between 65.4 and 96.2% and 50.0-93.0%, respectively. Vaccine efficacy in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients was 72% (95%CI, 39-88%) in 18-49-year-olds and 67% (95%CI, 53-78%) in ≥ 50-year-olds (median follow-up 21 months). Vaccine efficacy in ≥ 18-year-old patients with hematologic malignancies was estimated at 87.2% (95%CI, 44.3-98.6%) up to 13 months post-vaccination. CONCLUSIONS Results suggest that RZV has an acceptable safety profile and induces immunity in an important proportion of ≥ 18-year-old immunocompromised patients. Longer follow-up studies are warranted to assess the duration of RZV induced immunity in immunocompromised patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Étienne Racine
- Department of Public Health and Social Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Canada
| | - Vladimir Gilca
- Department of Biological Risks' and Occupational Health, Québec Public Health Institute, Laval University Research, Hospital Center, Québec, Canada.
| | - Rachid Amini
- Department of Biological Risks' and Occupational Health, Québec Public Health Institute, Québec, Canada
| | - Matthew Tunis
- Centre for Immunization and Respiratory Infectious Diseases, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Shainoor Ismail
- Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Chantal Sauvageau
- Department of Biological Risks' and Occupational Health, Québec Public Health Institute, Laval University Research, Hospital Center, Québec, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rashid H, Dey A, Manocha R, Tashani M, Macartney K, Beard F. Australia's national zoster vaccination program: Knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of general practitioners. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 44. [PMID: 32664832 DOI: 10.33321/cdi.2020.44.59] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
Objectives To assess knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of Australian general practitioners (GPs) regarding herpes zoster vaccination under the National Immunisation Program (NIP) from 2016 for adults aged 70-79 years. Design, setting, participants National cross-sectional online survey of GPs, October-November 2017. Outcome measures Knowledge, attitudes and behaviour regarding zoster vaccination, including challenges experienced and recommendations for improvement. Results Of the 1026 GPs who responded (response rate 7.9%), 98.5% were aware that zoster vaccine is NIP-funded for adults aged 70-79 years and 85.4% that it is recommended for age 60-69 years; however, 51.3% incorrectly thought it is routinely recommended for age 50-59 years. A minority (4.6%) incorrectly believed that being immunocompromised is not a contraindication to zoster vaccination and 16.0% that it cannot be co-administered with influenza or pneumococcal vaccine. Almost half (48.9%) rarely or never reported zoster vaccination data to the Australian Immunisation Register (AIR). Challenges perceived included lack of adequate information on vaccine contraindications; efficacy and safety concerns; and difficulty applying age criteria for NIP eligibility in general practice. Respondents indicated a desire for program expansion to include younger and older adult age groups. Conclusion This Australian GP survey, conducted one year after the introduction of the national zoster vaccination program, identified some knowledge gaps. A repeat survey of GPs is warranted to determine whether these issues persist, particularly regarding contraindication to vaccination for immunocompromised individuals. We encourage all GPs to offer zoster vaccination in line with current Australian evidence-based guidelines, particularly for the NIP-funded 70-79 years cohort; ensuring compliance with relevant contraindications; and reporting to AIR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harunor Rashid
- National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Kids Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Aditi Dey
- National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Kids Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Ramesh Manocha
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Healthed, PO Box 500, Burwood, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mohamed Tashani
- National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Kids Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kristine Macartney
- National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Kids Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Frank Beard
- National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Kids Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gagliardi AMZ, Andriolo BNG, Torloni MR, Soares BGO, de Oliveira Gomes J, Andriolo RB, Canteiro Cruz E. Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2019:CD008858. [PMID: 31696946 PMCID: PMC6836378 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008858.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of aging is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older people to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. The USA Food and Drug Administration has approved a herpes zoster vaccine with an attenuated active virus, live zoster vaccine (LZV), for clinical use amongst older adults, which has been tested in large populations. A new adjuvanted recombinant VZV subunit zoster vaccine, recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), has also been approved. It consists of recombinant VZV glycoprotein E and a liposome-based AS01B adjuvant system. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2016. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults. SEARCH METHODS For this 2019 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, January 2019), MEDLINE (1948 to January 2019), Embase (2010 to January 2019), CINAHL (1981 to January 2019), LILACS (1982 to January 2019), WHO ICTRP (on 31 January 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (on 31 January 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included 11 new studies involving 18,615 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 24 studies involving 88,531 participants. Only three studies assessed the incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan. Fifteen studies used LZV. Nine studies tested an RZV. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Most data for the primary outcome (incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-quality evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6) of mild to moderate intensity (moderate-quality evidence). These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or over. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-quality evidence). There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that there symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All of the other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV and RZV are effective in preventing herpes zoster disease for up to three years (the main studies did not follow participants for more than three years). To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna MZ Gagliardi
- Universidade Federal de São PauloDepartment of Geriatrics and GerontologyRua Professor Francisco de Castro 105São PauloSão PauloBrazil04020‐050
| | - Brenda NG Andriolo
- Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em SaúdeCochrane BrazilRua Borges Lagoa, 564 cj 63São PauloSão PauloBrazil04038‐000
| | - Maria Regina Torloni
- Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em SaúdeCochrane BrazilRua Borges Lagoa, 564 cj 63São PauloSão PauloBrazil04038‐000
| | - Bernardo GO Soares
- Brazilian Cochrane CentreAlameda Itu 1025/ 42São PauloSão PauloBrazil01421‐001
| | - Juliana de Oliveira Gomes
- Universidade Federal de São PauloDepartment of Geriatrics and GerontologyRua Professor Francisco de Castro 105São PauloSão PauloBrazil04020‐050
| | - Regis B Andriolo
- Universidade do Estado do ParáDepartment of Public HealthTravessa Perebebuí, 2623BelémParáBrazil66087‐670
| | - Eduardo Canteiro Cruz
- Universidade Federal de São PauloDepartment of Geriatrics and GerontologyRua Professor Francisco de Castro 105São PauloSão PauloBrazil04020‐050
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
Vaccines represent one of the most important advances in science and medicine, helping people around the world in preventing the spread of infectious diseases. However, there are still gaps in vaccination programs in many countries. Out of 11.2 million children born in EU region, more than 500,000 infants did not receive the complete three-dose series of diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus vaccine before the first birthday. Data shows that there were more than 30,000 measles cases in the European region in recent years, and measles cases are rising in the USA. There are about 20 million children in the world still not getting adequate coverage of basic vaccines. Emerging infectious diseases such as malaria, Ebola virus disease, and Zika virus disease also threaten public health around the world. This chapter provides an overview of recent advances in vaccine development and technologies, manufacturing, characterization of various vaccines, challenges, and strategies in vaccine clinical development. It also provides an overview of recently approved major vaccines for human use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Catarina Silva
- grid.5808.50000 0001 1503 7226UCIBIO, REQUIMTE, MEDTECH, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - João Nuno Moreira
- grid.8051.c0000 0000 9511 4342Center for Neurosciences and Cell Biology (CNC) and Faculty of Pharmacy (FFUC), University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - José Manuel Sousa Lobo
- grid.5808.50000 0001 1503 7226UCIBIO, REQUIMTE, MEDTECH, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Hugo Almeida
- grid.5808.50000 0001 1503 7226UCIBIO, REQUIMTE, MEDTECH, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
|
8
|
Gilhus NE, Romi F, Hong Y, Skeie GO. Myasthenia gravis and infectious disease. J Neurol 2018; 265:1251-1258. [DOI: 10.1007/s00415-018-8751-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2017] [Revised: 01/11/2018] [Accepted: 01/11/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|