scholarly journals Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematological malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne S.K. Teh ◽  
Julien Coussement ◽  
Zoe C.F. Neoh ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Smaro Lazarakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Risk Patient ◽  
Seropositivity Rate ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Underlying Malignancy ◽  
Patient Groups

The objectives of this study were to assess the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies of immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination stratified by underlying malignancy and published from 1 January 2021 to 31 August 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity following 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine with rates of seropositivity following 1 dose, rates of positive neutralising antibody (nAb), cellular responses and adverse events as secondary outcomes. Rates were pooled from single arm studies while rates of seropositivity were compared against the rate in healthy controls for comparator studies using a random effects model and expressed as a pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Forty-four studies (16 mixed group, 28 disease specific) with 7064 patients were included in the analysis (2331 following first dose, 4733 following second dose). Overall seropositivity rates were 61-67% following 2 doses and 37-51% following 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. The lowest seropositivity rate was 51% in CLL patients and was highest in patients with acute leukaemia (93%). Following 2 doses, nAb and cellular response rates were 57-60% and 40-75% respectively. Active treatment, ongoing or recent treatment with targeted and CD-20 monoclonal antibody therapies within 12 months was associated with poor COVID-19 vaccine immune responses. New approaches to prevention are urgently required to reduce COVID-19 infection morbidity and mortality in high-risk patient groups that respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination.

scholarly journals Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne S.K. Teh ◽  
Julien Coussement ◽  
Zoe C.F. Neoh ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Smaro Lazarakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Haematological Malignancy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Risk Patient ◽  
Seropositivity Rate ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Underlying Malignancy ◽  
Patient Groups

The objectives of this study were to assess the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies of immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination stratified by underlying malignancy and published from 1 January 2021 to 31 August 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity following 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine with rates of seropositivity following 1 dose, rates of positive neutralising antibody (nAb), cellular responses and adverse events as secondary outcomes. Rates were pooled from single arm studies while rates of seropositivity were compared against the rate in healthy controls for comparator studies using a random effects model and expressed as a pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Forty-four studies (16 mixed group, 28 disease specific) with 7064 patients were included in the analysis (2331 following first dose, 4733 following second dose). Overall seropositivity rates were 61-67% following 2 doses and 37-51% following 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. The lowest seropositivity rate was 51% in CLL patients and was highest in patients with acute leukaemia (93%). Following 1 dose, nAb and cellular response rates were 18-63% and 33-86% respectively. Active treatment, ongoing or recent treatment with targeted and CD-20 monoclonal antibody therapies within 12 months was associated with poor COVID-19 vaccine immune responses. New approaches to prevention are urgently required to reduce COVID-19 infection morbidity and mortality in high-risk patient groups that respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination.

Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure and Apnea of Prematurity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bayane Sabsabi ◽  
Ava Harrison ◽  
Laura Banfield ◽  
Amit Mukerji
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Apnea Of Prematurity

Objective The study aimed to systematically review and analyze the impact of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on apnea of prematurity (AOP) in preterm neonates. Study Design In this systematic review and meta-analysis, experimental studies enrolling preterm infants comparing NIPPV (synchronized, nonsynchronized, and bi-level) and CPAP (all types) were searched in multiple databases and screened for the assessment of AOP. Primary outcome was AOP frequency per hour (as defined by authors of included studies). Results Out of 4,980 articles identified, 18 studies were included with eight studies contributing to the primary outcome. All studies had a high risk of bias, with significant heterogeneity in definition and measurement of AOP. There was no difference in AOPs per hour between NIPPV versus CPAP (weighted mean difference = −0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.76 to 0.37; eight studies, 456 patients). However, in a post hoc analysis evaluating the presence of any AOP (over varying time periods), the pooled odds ratio (OR) was lower with NIPPV (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.32–0.67; 10 studies, 872 patients). Conclusion NIPPV was not associated with decrease in AOP frequency, although demonstrated lower odds of developing any AOP. However, definite recommendations cannot be made based on the quality of the published evidence. Key Points

scholarly journals 732 Delay to Elective Colorectal Cancer Surgery and its Potential Implications During the Covid-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Whittaker ◽  
M Abdelrazek ◽  
A Fitzpatrick ◽  
J Froud ◽  
J Kelly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Elective Resection ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Number Needed To Harm

Abstract Aim The ongoing Covid-19 pandemic has interrupted the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). This systematic review will assess literature concerning the risk of delay of elective surgery for CRC patients, focusing on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Method A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020189158). Medline, EMBASE and Scopus were searched. Delay to elective surgery was defined as the period between CRC diagnosis and the day of surgery. Metanalyses of the outcome’s OS and DFS were conducted. Forest plots, funnel plots, and tests of heterogeneity were produced. An estimated Number Needed to Harm (NNH) was calculated for statistically significant pooled Hazard Ratios (HRs). Results Of 3753 articles identified, seven met the inclusion criteria. Encompassing 314560 patients, three of the seven studies showed that a delay to elective resection is associated with poorer OS or DFS. OS was assessed at a one-month delay, the HR for six datasets was 1.13 (95%CI 1.02-1.26, p = 0.020) and at three months the pooled HR for three datasets was 1.57 (95%CI 1.16-2.12, p = 0.004). Estimated NNHs for a delay at one month and three months were 35 and 10 respectively. Delay was non-significantly negatively associated with DFS on meta-analysis. Conclusions This review recommends that elective surgery for CRC patients is not postponed, as evidence suggests delays from diagnosis are associated with poorer outcomes. Focused research is essential so that patient groups can be prioritized based on risk factors for future pandemics.

Vacuum Therapy and Internal Drainage as the First-Line Endoscopic Treatment for Post-Bariatric Leaks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Issaree Laopeamthong ◽  
Thanita Akethanin ◽  
Wisit Kasetsermwiriya ◽  
Suphakarn Techapongsatorn ◽  
Amarit Tansawet
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Vacuum Therapy ◽  
Internal Drainage ◽  
First Line

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Several endoscopic methods can be employed to manage post-bariatric leaks. However, endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) and endoscopic internal drainage (EID) are relatively new methods, and studies regarding these methods are scarce. We performed a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of EVT and EID. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Databases were searched for eligible studies. The clinical success of leak closure was the primary outcome of interest. A proportional meta-analysis was performed for pooling the primary outcome using a fixed-effects model. A meta-analysis or descriptive analysis of other outcomes was performed based on the data availability. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Data from 3 EVT and 10 EID studies (<i>n</i> = 279) were used for evidence synthesis. The leak closure rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) of EVT and EID were 85.2% (75.1%–95.4%) and 91.6% (88.1%–95.2%), respectively. The corresponding mean treatment durations (95% CI) were 28 (2.4–53.6) and 78.4 (50.1–106.7) days, respectively. However, data about other outcomes were extremely limited; thus, a pooled analysis could not be performed. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Both EVT and EID were effective when used as the first-line treatment for post-bariatric leaks. However, larger studies must be conducted to compare the efficacy of the 2 interventions.

scholarly journals Assessment of humoral and cell-mediated immune responses to pertussis vaccination: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e028109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Funbi Akinola ◽  
Rudzani Muloiwa ◽  
Gregory, D Hussey ◽  
Violette Dirix ◽  
Benjamin Kagina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Response ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Population Type

IntroductionGlobally, some studies show a resurgence of pertussis. The risks and benefits of using whole-cell pertussis (wP) or acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines in the control of the disease have been widely debated. Better control of pertussis will require improved understanding of the immune response to pertussis vaccines. Improved understanding and assessment of the immunity induced by pertussis vaccines is thus imperative. Several studies have documented different immunological outcomes to pertussis vaccination from an array of assays. We propose to conduct a systematic review of the different immunological assays and outcomes used in the assessment of the humoraland cell-mediated immune response following pertussis vaccination.Methods and analysisThe primary outcomes for consideration are quality and quantity of immune responses (humoral and cell-mediated) post-pertussis vaccination. Of interest as secondary outcomes are types of immunoassays used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, types of biological samples used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, as well as the types of antigens used to stimulate these samples during post-pertussis vaccination immune response assessments. Different electronic databases (including PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO Host, Scopus and Web of Science) will be accessed for peer-reviewed published and grey literature evaluating immune responses to pertussis vaccines between 1990 and 2019. The quality of included articles will be assessed using standardised risk and quality assessment tools specific to the study design used in each article. Data extraction will be done using a data extraction form. The extracted data will be analysed using STATA V.14.0 and RevMan V.5.3 software. A subgroup analysis will be conducted based on the study population, type of vaccine (wP or aP) and type of immune response (cell-mediated or humoral). Guidelines for reporting systematic reviews in the revised 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement will be used in this study.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study as it is a systematic review. We will only make use of data already available in the public space. Findings will be reported via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific meetings and workshops.Trial registration numberCRD42018102455.

scholarly journals The use of triclosan-coated sutures to prevent surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e029727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Imran Ahmed ◽  
Adam Jonathan Boulton ◽  
Sana Rizvi ◽  
William Carlos ◽  
Edward Dickenson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Surgical Site Infections ◽  
Causative Factor ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Introduction and objectivesSurgical site infections (SSIs) represent a common and serious complication of all surgical interventions. Microorganisms are able to colonise sutures that are implanted in the skin, which is a causative factor of SSIs. Triclosan-coated sutures are antibacterial sutures aimed at reducing SSIs. Our objective is to update the existing literature by systematically reviewing available evidence to assess the effectiveness of triclosan-coated sutures in the prevention of SSIs.MethodsA systematic review of EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED (Allied and complementary medicine database) and CENTRAL was performed to identify full text randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on 31 May 2019.InterventionTriclosan-coated sutures versus non-triclosan-coated sutures.Primary outcomeOur primary outcome was the development of SSIs at 30 days postoperatively. A meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effects model.ResultsTwenty-five RCTs were included involving 11 957 participants. Triclosan-coated sutures were used in 6008 participants and non triclosan-coated sutures were used in 5949. Triclosan-coated sutures significantly reduced the risk of SSIs at 30 days (relative risk 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.82). Further sensitivity analysis demonstrated that triclosan-coated sutures significantly reduced the risk of SSIs in both clean and contaminated surgery.ConclusionTriclosan-coated sutures have been shown to significantly reduced the risk of SSIs when compared with standard sutures. This is in agreement with previous work in this area. This study represented the largest review to date in this area. This moderate quality evidence recommends the use of triclosan-coated sutures in order to reduce the risk of SSIs particularly in clean and contaminated surgical procedures.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42014014856

Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Preterm Infants: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Fleeman ◽  
Yenal Dundar ◽  
Prakesh S Shah ◽  
Ben NJ Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Safe Alternative

AbstractBackgroundHeated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is gaining popularity as a mode of respiratory support. We updated a systematic review and meta-analyses examining the efficacy and safety of HHHFNC compared with standard treatments for preterm infants. The primary outcome was the need for reintubation for preterm infants following mechanical ventilation (post-extubation analysis) or need for intubation for preterm infants not previously intubated (analysis of primary respiratory support)MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HHHFNC versus standard treatments. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe post-extubation analysis included ten RCTs (n = 1,201), and the analysis of primary respiratory support included ten RCTs (n = 1,676). There were no statistically significant differences for outcomes measuring efficacy, including the primary outcome. There were statistically significant differences favoring HHHFNC versus nasal cannula positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for air leak (post-extubation, risk ratio [RR] 0.29, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.76, I2 = 0) and nasal trauma (post-extubation: 0.35, 95 percent CI 0.27 to 0.46, I2 = 5 percent; primary respiratory support: RR 0.52, 95 percent CI 0.37 to 0.74; I2 = 27 percent). Studies, particularly those of primary respiratory support, included very few preterm infants with gestational age (GA) <28 weeks.ConclusionsHHHFNC may offer an efficacious and safe alternative to NCPAP for some infants but evidence is lacking for preterm infants with GA ≤28 weeks.

Treatment of Superficial Vein Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 119 (03) ◽  
pp. 479-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Duffett ◽  
Clive Kearon ◽  
Marc Rodger ◽  
Marc Carrier
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Event Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Superficial Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic ◽  
Event Rates ◽  
Deep Vein

Background The optimal first line treatment for patients with isolated superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) of the lower extremity is unknown. Objective This article reports estimates of the rate of venous thromboembolic complications among patients with SVT according to treatment. Materials and Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using unrestricted searches of electronic databases. Reported events were transformed to event per 100 patient-years of follow-up and a random effects model was used to calculate pooled rates according to pre-specified treatment categories. The primary outcome was the occurrence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) during the study follow-up period. Results Seventeen articles, including 6,862 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Fondaparinux had the lowest event rate with 1.4 events per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5–2.8, I 2 = 18%). Pooled event rates for DVT or PE ranged from 9.3 to 16.6 events per 100 patient-years across other treatment categories, and the pooled event rate for no treatment/placebo was 10.5 events per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 3.0–22.0). Major bleeding was low and similar across all treatment categories. Heterogeneity was moderate to high for most pooled estimates. Conclusion While pooled event rates suggest that fondaparinux achieves the lowest rate of DVT or PE, low-quality evidence for other treatments prevents firm conclusions about the optimal treatment for SVT.

scholarly journals Hypertonic dextrose injections (prolotherapy) in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina WS Sit ◽  
Vincent CH Chung ◽  
Kenneth D. Reeves ◽  
David Rabago ◽  
Keith KW Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Composite Scale ◽  
Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Symptomatic Knee ◽  
Pain Subscale ◽  
Hypertonic Dextrose

Abstract Hypertonic dextrose injections (prolotherapy) is an emerging treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) but its efficacy is uncertain. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to synthesize clinical evidence on the effect of prolotherapy for knee OA. Fifteen electronic databases were searched from their inception to September 2015. The primary outcome of interest was score change on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC). Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate risk of bias and one quasi–randomized trial were included, with data from a total of 258 patients. In the meta-analysis of two eligible studies, prolotherapy is superior to exercise alone by a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.18 to 1.45, p = 0.012), 0.78 (95% CI: 0.25 to 1.30, p = 0.001) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.04 to 1.20, p = 0.035) on the WOMAC composite scale; and WOMAC function and pain subscale scores respectively. Moderate heterogeneity exists in all cases. Overall, prolotherapy conferred a positive and significant beneficial effect in the treatment of knee OA. Adequately powered, longer-term trials with uniform end points are needed to better elucidate the efficacy of prolotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document