| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Sen, P, et al.
(author)
-
Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys
- 2023
-
In: Rheumatology (Oxford, England). - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1462-0332 .- 1462-0324. ; 62:10, s. 3291-3301
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- ObjectiveCOVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys.MethodsThe first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.ResultsWe analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs – OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs – OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7–10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8–0.97)].ConclusionVaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Rudke, A. P., et al.
(author)
-
Landscape changes over 30 years of intense economic activity in the upper Paraná River basin
- 2022
-
In: Ecological Informatics. - : Elsevier BV. - 1574-9541. ; 72
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In this study, we show the complexity associated with the recent land cover changes by elucidating the paths of 30 years of changes in the Upper Paraná River Basin (UPRB), a region severely impacted by agricultural activity, one of the areas with the highest density in the production of hydroelectricity, biofuels and food in the world. In this sense, a post-classification comparison approach based on Landsat images was used to identify detailed ‘from-to’ paths behind those land cover changes. The most expressive changes were the expansion of Cropland and Forest areas and the reduction in savannas, with a net change of 17.9%, 4.1%, and −16.9% of the UPRB area, respectively. Cropland areas showed an expressive increase between 1985 and 2015, rising from 249,439 km2 (27.7%) to 412,909 km2 (45.9%). Forest areas increased from 149,389 km2 to 185,839 km2 in the period. Notably, for this class, an intense spatial dynamic of losses (7.5%) and gains (11.6%) took place between 1985 and 2015. This behavior is related to the disappearance of native vegetation fragments in some sub-basins, as well as to afforestation, reforestation, and/or forest restoration in others. The Cerrado (a typical tropical savanna in South America), the most impacted natural biome of the Basin, decreased from 21.9% of the UPRB in 1985 (196,746 km2) to only about 5% of the whole UPRB area in 2015. Grassland areas, mostly used for livestock, decreased from 271,827 km2 (30.2%) to 229,007 km2 (25.5%). This net decrease was associated with a reduction of 160,830 km2 (17.8%) and the appearance of 118,010 km2 (13.2%) in new areas, previously occupied by tropical savannas in 1985. In conclusion, economic factors were the main drivers for land cover changes, especially agriculture and livestock activities, besides forestry and hydroelectric energy production. In addition, Grassland areas that predominated on the left banks of the UPRB in 1985 retreated with the advance of Cropland areas, mainly due to the expansion of sugarcane for ethanol production, a biofuel widely used in Brazil. In turn, pasture areas migrated to the right bank and occupied a significant part of the Cerrado. Finally, our results demonstrate that the transition dynamics among land cover classes can involve complex political-economical mechanisms that are not always captured by remote sensing.
|
|
| 5. |
- Andreoli, L., et al.
(author)
-
COVID-19 VACCINE SAFETY DURING PREGNANCY AND BREASTFEEDING IN WOMEN WITH AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES : RESULTS FROM THE COVAD STUDY
- 2023
-
In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 56-57
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Background: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) is often attributed to the fear of adverse events (AE) and disease flares (DF). No data are available regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety in this population.Objectives: We aimed at describing delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related AE (minor and major), DF, and related AID treatment modifications from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.Methods: Among complete responses from 9201 participants as of June 21, 2022, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Six subgroups were identified upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and their pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of any dose of vaccine (Figure 1).Results: Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding AID patients were identified and their vaccination rates (at least one dose) was 100% and 96.2%, respectively (Table 1). Overall AE, minor AE, and major AE were reported significantly more frequently by pregnant than non-pregnant patients (45% vs. 26%, p=0.01; 40% vs. 25.9%, p=0.03; 17.5% vs. 4.6%, p<0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18% of age- and disease-matched control patients (n=2315). All DF in pregnant/breastfeeding patients were managed with glucocorticoids and a fifth of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressive treatment.Conclusion: This study provides the first insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during the antenatal period in women with AID. While AEs were more commonly reported by pregnant patients with AID, these were no higher than among pregnant healthy controls without AID. These observations are reassuring, likely to strengthen physician-patient communication and overcome hesitancy as the benefits for the mother and fetus by passive immunization are likely to overweigh the potential risks of AE and DF.Reference: [1]Fazal ZZ, et al; COVAD Study Group. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int 2022; 42:2151-2158.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Jeliazkova, N, et al.
(author)
-
Towards FAIR nanosafety data
- 2021
-
In: Nature nanotechnology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1748-3395 .- 1748-3387. ; 16:86, s. 644-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- Chertow, GM, et al.
(author)
-
Study Design and Baseline Characteristics of the CARDINAL Trial: A Phase 3 Study of Bardoxolone Methyl in Patients with Alport Syndrome
- 2021
-
In: American journal of nephrology. - : S. Karger AG. - 1421-9670 .- 0250-8095. ; 52:3, s. 180-189
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- <b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Alport syndrome is a rare genetic disorder that affects as many as 60,000 persons in the USA and a total of 103,000 persons (<5 per 10,000) in the European Union [1, 2]. It is the second most common inherited cause of kidney failure and is characterized by progressive loss of kidney function that often leads to end-stage kidney disease. Currently, there are no approved disease-specific agents for therapeutic use. We designed a phase 3 study (CARDINAL; NCT03019185) to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of bardoxolone methyl in patients with Alport syndrome. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The CARDINAL phase 3 study is an international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized registrational trial. Eligible patients were of ages 12–70 years with confirmed genetic or histologic diagnosis of Alport syndrome, eGFR 30–90 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, and urinary albumin to creatinine ratio (UACR) ≤3,500 mg/g. Patients with B-type natriuretic peptide values >200 pg/mL at baseline or with significant cardiovascular histories were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to bardoxolone methyl or placebo, with stratification by baseline UACR. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 371 patients were screened, and 157 patients were randomly assigned to receive bardoxolone methyl (<i>n</i> = 77) or placebo (<i>n</i> = 80). The average age at screening was 39.2 years, and 23 (15%) were <18 years of age. Of the randomized population, 146 (93%) had confirmed genetic diagnosis of Alport syndrome, and 62% of patients had X-linked mode of inheritance. Mean baseline eGFR was 62.7 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, and the geometric mean UACR was 141.0 mg/g. The average annual rate of eGFR decline prior to enrollment in the study was −4.9 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup> despite 78% of the patient population receiving ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or ARB therapy. <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> CARDINAL is one of the largest interventional, randomized controlled trials in Alport syndrome conducted to date. Despite the use of ACEi or ARB, patients were experiencing significant loss of kidney function prior to study entry.
|
|
| 12. |
- Giannopoulou, N., et al.
(author)
-
COVID-19 VACCINE SAFETY DURING PREGNANCY IN WOMEN WITH SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS
- 2023
-
In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 1495-1496
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Background: Vaccinations comprise a part of the antenatal care of pregnant women, including patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs). While COVID-19 vaccination has been shown to be safe in patients with SLE, data on vaccine-associated adverse events (AEs) during the antenatal and lactation period are scarce or lacking.Objectives: To investigate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and AEs in pregnant SLE patients.Methods: A total of 9201 complete responses were extracted on June 21st, 2022 from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) 2 database, a global e-survey involving 157 collaborators from 106 countries. Among respondents, 6787 (73.8%) were women. We identified 70 (1.1%) women who were exposed to at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy, among those 11 with SLE. Delayed onset (>7 days) vaccine-related AEs were extracted and triangulated with disease activity, treatment changes due to flare after vaccination, and COVID-19 infections in vaccinated pregnant women with SLE. Additionally, information on health-related quality of life and physical function was recorded using PROMIS at the time of survey completion.Results: The age of patients ranged from 28 to 39 years; 5/11 women were of Asian origin. None of these patients reported major vaccine AEs, including four patients with self-reported active SLE prior to the vaccination. None of them reported any change in the status of their autoimmune disease, and no hospitalisation or special treatment was recorded. Six women experienced minor vaccine AEs; two of them had active disease prior to vaccination. Four patients reported COVID-19 infection; two of them while they were pregnant and post-vaccination and two prior to pregnancy and vaccination. All four patients experienced symptoms of their disease, but no overt SLE flare was reported. At the time of survey completion, all patients reported their general health as being good to excellent in all aspects evaluated. Importantly, no APOs were reported.None of the patients reported thrombotic events post-vaccination, which provides some reassurance regarding COVID-19 vaccination in a patient population with a high risk for cardiovascular comorbidity and thrombosis, especially in the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies or in patients diagnosed with the antiphospholipid syndrome, a considerable portion within SLE populations. Moreover, it was reassuring to note an absence of association between experienced vaccine AEs and active disease prior to vaccination. Although minor AEs were common, they did not impair daily functioning, and the symptoms resolved in all patients after a median of 3 (IQR: 2.5–5.0) days.Conclusion: Our report adds relevant evidence concerning the sensitive issue of COVID-19 vaccine AEs and flares in SLE patients during the antenatal and lactation period. Despite the small sample size, the findings provide some reassurance and can contribute to informed decisions regarding vaccination in patients with SLE and high-risk pregnancies due to their background autoimmune disease. Based on the present data, the risk/benefit ration of COVID-19 vaccination appears favourable, with vaccines both providing passive immunisation to the fetus and active immunisation to the mother with no signals of exacerbation of the mother’s autoimmune disease.
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
