scholarly journals Immunogenicity and Safety of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (BBIBP-CoV) in patients with malignancy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona Ariamanesh ◽  
Pejman Porouhan ◽  
Babak PeyroShabany ◽  
Danial Fazilat-Panah ◽  
Mansoureh Dehghani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Neutralizing Antibody ◽  
Protein S ◽  
Immunological Methods ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Systemic Side Effects ◽  
Site Pain

Objective: Patients with malignancy suffer from a compromised immune system due to either the effects of malignancies or treatments. Cancer patients are at higher risk of different infections particularly SARS-CoV2 and usually produce weaker response to vaccines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Sinopharm, BBIBP-CoV) in patients with malignancy. Material and Method: In total 364 patients with cancer (median age: 54 years old, F/M ratio: 217/147) who received two doses of Sinopharm vaccine were enrolled in this study. Vaccine related side effects was assessed by a questionnaire and the presence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-Spike protein (S) IgG and neutralizing antibody two months following vaccination were measured by immunological methods. Results: Injection site pain and fever were the most common local and systemic side effects in vaccine receivers. Two months after the first dose, anti-S IgG and neutralizing antibody were detectable in 77.1% and 80.7% of all participants, respectively with an overall response to either or both measured in 86.9% of patients The rate of seroconversion was lower in older age, those with hematological malignancies and chemotherapy receivers. Conclusion: The result of study confirmed the safety and short-term efficacy of Sinopharm inactivated vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) in patients with different type of malignancies.

COVID-19 Vaccine and Fitness to Fly

2021 ◽  
Vol 92 (9) ◽  
pp. 698-701
Author(s):  
Daniel Gabbai ◽  
Aya Ekshtein ◽  
Omer Tehori ◽  
Oded Ben-Ari ◽  
Shachar Shapira
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Injection Site ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Common Side Effect ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Dose Administration ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Site Pain ◽  
The U.S

INTRODUCTION: On December 2020 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. This new vaccine has several side effects that can potentially impair function, which warrants special attention regarding aircrews fitness to fly following vaccination.METHODS: A survey was conducted in the Israeli Air Force (IAF) Aeromedical Center in order to characterize the side effects and their duration following Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine administration to aviators.RESULTS: The most common side effect was injection site pain. Headache, chills, myalgia, fatigue, and weakness were more common following the second dose administration. The difference is statistically significant. Following the second vaccine, duration of side effects was longer compared to the first vaccine (P-value 0.002).CONCLUSION: The IAF Aeromedical center policy for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine recipients among aircrew members, based on side effects duration and severity, is to temporarily ground from flight duties for 24 and 48 h following the first and the second dose, respectively.Gabbai D, Ekshtein A, Tehori O, Ben-Ari O, Shapira S. COVID-19 vaccine and fitness to fly. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2021; 92(9):698701.

Aseptic myonecrosis following intramuscular benzathine penicllin G injection: a novel syndrome

Diagnosis ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Ryan ◽  
Andrew Olson
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Injection Site ◽  
Pediatric Patient ◽  
Similar Case ◽  
Streptococcal Pharyngitis ◽  
Penicillin G ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Benzathine Penicillin ◽  
Benzathine Penicillin G ◽  
Site Pain

AbstractWe report a novel syndrome of aseptic myonecrosis in a child occurring after intramuscular (IM) benzathine penicillin G injection for the treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis. Common side effects of IM injection, including transient injection site pain and inflammation, are common and well described. However, isolated myonecrosis following IM injection in the pediatric patient has not been previously reported. Only one similar case, following IM diclofenac injection, has been discussed in the adult literature.

scholarly journals Adaptive immunity and neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern following vaccination in patients with cancer: the CAPTURE study

Nature Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Fendler ◽  
Scott T. C. Shepherd ◽  
Lewis Au ◽  
Katalin A. Wilkinson ◽  
Mary Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Neutralizing Antibody ◽  
Immune Monitoring ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Cell Responses ◽  
Solid Malignancies ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
Anti Cd20

AbstractCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antiviral response in a pan-tumor immune monitoring (CAPTURE) (NCT03226886) is a prospective cohort study of COVID-19 immunity in patients with cancer. Here we evaluated 585 patients following administration of two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccines, administered 12 weeks apart. Seroconversion rates after two doses were 85% and 59% in patients with solid and hematological malignancies, respectively. A lower proportion of patients had detectable titers of neutralizing antibodies (NAbT) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC) versus wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2. Patients with hematological malignancies were more likely to have undetectable NAbT and had lower median NAbT than those with solid cancers against both SARS-CoV-2 WT and VOC. By comparison with individuals without cancer, patients with hematological, but not solid, malignancies had reduced neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses. Seroconversion showed poor concordance with NAbT against VOC. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection boosted the NAb response including against VOC, and anti-CD20 treatment was associated with undetectable NAbT. Vaccine-induced T cell responses were detected in 80% of patients and were comparable between vaccines or cancer types. Our results have implications for the management of patients with cancer during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Side Effects and Perceptions Following Sinopharm COVID-19 Vaccination

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Balsam Qubais ◽  
Rula Al-Shahrabi ◽  
Shaikha Salah Alhaj ◽  
Zainab Mansour Alkokhardi ◽  
Ahmed Omar Adrees
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Injection Site ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Site ◽  
Site Pain

Objectives Vaccines are one of the best interventions developed for eradicating COVID-19 the rapid creation of vaccinations was increased the risk of vaccine safety problems. The aim of this study to provide evidence on Sinopharm COVID-19 vaccine side effects. Methods A cross-sectional survey study was conducted between January and April 2021 to collect data on the effects of COVID-19 vaccine among individuals in the UAE. Demographic data chronic conditions side effects of the 1st and 2nd dose toward the vaccination, and the response of unwilling taking COVID-19 vaccine were reported. Results The most common side effects of post 1st dose (less than 49 years old vs >49 years) were normal injection site pain, fatigue, and headache while pain at the vaccination site fatigue lethargy headache and tenderness were the most side effects of the post 2nd dose in both groups. All the side effects in both doses were more prevalent among the participants less than 49-year-old group. Among females vs males side effects were more common in females compared with males in both doses in both doses. The most common adverse reactions of 1st dose in (females vs males) were fatigue lethargy headache while in 2nd dose were fatigue sever injection site pain. The most common reason of not willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine were the vaccines are not effective and they were not authorized to take vaccine. Conclusion The 1st and 2nd dose post-vaccination side effects were mild predictable and there were no hospitalization cases this data will help to reduce the vaccine hesitancy.

scholarly journals Adaptive immunity and neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern following vaccination in patients with cancer: The CAPTURE study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Fendler ◽  
Scott Shepherd ◽  
Lewis Au ◽  
Katalin Wilkinson ◽  
Mary Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Neutralizing Antibody ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Cell Responses ◽  
Solid Malignancies ◽  
Antibody Titers ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
Anti Cd20

Abstract CAPTURE (NCT03226886) is a prospective cohort study of COVID-19 immunity in patients with cancer. Here we evaluated 585 patients following administration of two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccines, administered 12 weeks apart. Seroconversion rates after two doses were 85% and 59% in patients with solid and hematological malignancies, respectively. A lower proportion of patients had detectable neutralizing antibody titers (NAbT) against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) vs wild-type (WT). Patients with hematological malignancies were more likely to have undetectable NAbT and had lower median NAbT vs solid cancers against both WT and VOCs. In comparison with individuals without cancer, patients with haematological, but not solid, malignancies had reduced NAb responses. Seroconversion showed poor concordance with NAbT against VOCs. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection boosted NAb response including against VOCs, and anti-CD20 treatment was associated with undetectable NAbT. Vaccine-induced T-cell responses were detected in 80% of patients, and were comparable between vaccines or cancer types. Our results have implications for the management of cancer patients during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the effectiveness and acceptability of intramuscular clozapine injection: illustrative case series

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 239-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Henry ◽  
Ruth Massey ◽  
Kathy Morgan ◽  
Johanne Deeks ◽  
Hannah Macfarlane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Oral Route ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Illustrative Case ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Clinical Presentations ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Site Pain

Aims and methodA series of eleven patients prescribed intramuscular clozapine at five UK sites is presented. Using routinely collected clinical data, we describe the use, efficacy and safety of this treatment modality.ResultsWe administered 188 doses of intramuscular clozapine to eight patients. The remaining three patients accepted oral medication. With the exception of minor injection site pain and nodules, side-effects were as expected with oral clozapine, and there were no serious untoward events. Nine patients were successfully established on oral clozapine with significant improvement in their clinical presentations.Clinical implicationsAlthough a novel formulation in the UK, we have shown that intramuscular clozapine can be used safely and effectively when the oral route is initially refused.

scholarly journals Corticosteroids: Review of the History, the Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects in the Treatment of Joint Pain

2021 ◽  
Vol S1;24 (1;S1) ◽  
pp. S233-S246
Keyword(s):  
Articular Cartilage ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Immune Function ◽  
Joint Pain ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Systemic Side Effects

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids have been used for the past 70 years in the treatment of various musculoskeletal conditions. This includes its use for joint pain such as rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. OBJECTIVES: A narrative review of the literature from its initial discovery to the present day to summarize the research of corticosteroids for joint pain to determine the safety and effectiveness of this commonly used and prescribed medication. METHODS: A review of the literature was performed regarding the effectiveness and side effects of corticosteroids for joint and osteoarthritis conditions. RESULTS: The current evidence would suggest that the use of corticosteroids provides moderate short-term benefit for reducing pain and improving functioning. These benefits generally last several weeks without long-term effectiveness. In addition to its limited short-term effectiveness, there are multiple potential adverse effects including toxicity to articular cartilage and numerous systemic side effects such as increases in blood glucose levels, a reduction in immune function, and an increased risk of infections. LIMITATIONS: English only articles were reviewed. No attempt was made to perform a formal statistical or meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence would suggest that the use of corticosteroids provides moderate evidence for short-term pain reduction and improvement in function. There are multiple potential adverse effects, such as toxic damage to articular cartilage, as well as numerous systemic side effects, including a reduction in immune function and an increased risk of infection, of which physicians need to be aware. KEY WORDS: Cortisone, corticosteroids, arthritis, joint, pain, adverse effects, immune function, infections

scholarly journals Qualitative Assessment of Early Adverse Effects of Pfizer–BioNTech and Sinopharm COVID-19 Vaccines by Telephone Interviews

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 950
Author(s):  
Sami Abu-Halaweh ◽  
Rami Alqassieh ◽  
Aiman Suleiman ◽  
Mohammed Qussay Al-Sabbagh ◽  
Maram AbuHalaweh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Injection Site ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Qualitative Assessment ◽  
Injection Site Pain ◽  
Telephone Interviews ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Site Pain

Vaccines are considered the best approach for countering the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we compared early side effects associated with vaccination with the Sinopharm and Pfizer–BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines. Participants of this observational cohort were interviewed based on semi-structured telephone interviews, with enquiries about side effects that developed after vaccination with each dose of these vaccines. Overall, 1004 participants were enrolled, of which 51.1% received Sinopharm vaccine and 48.9% received the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine. After the first dose, 46.3% of participants had an adverse reaction, with injection site pain most commonly being reported (33.2%). Participants who received the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine had significantly higher frequencies of all types of adverse reactions (p < 0.01), with no significant differences in the duration of adverse reactions between the two vaccines. Regarding the second dose, 48.6% of participants had adverse reactions, with injection site pain being most commonly reported (29%). Those who received the Pfizer vaccine reported higher frequencies of all adverse reactions (p < 0.01). However, a longer duration of adverse reactions was seen among Sinopharm vaccine recipients as compared to Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine recipients (p = 0.01). In conclusion, early adverse effects are reported following all types of vaccines but these are more likely to be encountered following the administration of new-generation vaccines. These side effects are mostly mild and treatable.

Bipolar radiofrequency induced thermotherapy and 1064 nm Nd:Yag laser in endovenous occlusion of insufficient veins: short term follow up results

VASA ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krnic ◽  
Sucic
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Nd:Yag Laser ◽  
Main Stem ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Main Trunk ◽  
Bipolar Radiofrequency ◽  
Saphenous Veins ◽  
Skin Redness ◽  
Complete Failure

Background: The aim of this study is to report our results in main stem vein closure using the bipolar radiofrequency induced thermotherapy (RFITT) system and the 1064nm Nd:Yag laser. Patients and methods: 44 incompetent main stem veins (37 great saphenous veins, one lesser saphenous vein, and 6 anterior accessory saphenous veins) in 29 patients were treated using RFITT. 53 incompetent main stem veins (45 great saphenous veins, 4 lesser saphenous veins, and 4 anterior accessory saphenous veins) in 43 patients were treated endovenously with 1064 nm Nd:Yag laser. All patients underwent postoperative duplex scanning within a month after procedure, as well as a short interview regarding postoperative discomfort. Results: In main stem veins treated with RFITT, the success rate within the first month was 86,4 % (38 out of 44 veins). Complete failure rate was 13,6 % (6 out of 44 veins). In 53 main stem veins treated by 1064 nm Nd:Yag laser, the success rate was 100 %, consisting of 98,1 % complete success (52/53 veins), and 1,9 % partial success (1/53 veins). None of the patients treated with RFITT experienced postoperative adverse effects, whereas 13/43 (30,2 %) patients treated with laser had to use oral analgesics after the treatment, and 21/43 (48,8 %) patients reported transient skin changes, such as bruising or skin redness. Conclusions: RFITT system was fairly efficient in the short term for closure of main trunk veins, whereas longer term results are still scarce. Postoperative side effects of RFITT were minimal. 1064nm Nd:Yag laser, according to short term results, proved to be very effective for main stem vein closure. Postoperative side effects related to 1064 nm Nd:Yag endovenous laser treatment proved to be minor, transient, and acceptable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document