Search

Bioresorbable scaffolds have emerged as a potential breakthrough for the treatment of coronary artery lesions. The need for drug release and plaque scaffolding is temporary, and leaving a permanent stent once the process of plaque recoil and vessel healing has ended might be superfluous or even deleterious exposing the patient to the risk of very late thrombosis, eliminating vessel reactivity, impairing non-invasive imaging and precluding possible future surgical revascularization. This long-term potential limitation of permanent bare metal stents might be overcome by using a resorbable scaffold. The metallic and antithrombotic properties make the resorbable magnesium scaffold an appealing technology for the treatment of coronary artery lesions. Notwithstanding this, its mechanical properties substantially differ from those of conventional bare metal stents, and previous experience using polymer-based scaffolds has shown that a standardized implantation technique and optimal patient and lesion selection are key factors for a successful implantation. A panel of expert cardiologists gathered to find a consensus on the best practices for Magmaris implantation in a selected patient population and to discuss the rationale for new potential future indications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research on fuzzy implication functions has exponentially grown in the last decades becoming one of the main topics studied in the Fuzzy Logic community. These efforts have led to significant advances on the theoretical (mainly) and applied aspects, but the overwhelming number of papers hinder the tracking of the new results and the problems that remain unsolved. The goal of this paper is to determine the valuable practices in the research on classes of fuzzy implication functions and the desirable characteristics that a paper on this topic should have to be useful for a reader. Clearly adopting these features can accelerate the pace of the future research and be constructive for new researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

En el año 2015 la Sociedad Española de Reumatología (SER) publicó su posicionamiento sobre fármacos biosimilares. En esta actualización, la SER, sigue manifestando su compromiso inequívoco con la sostenibilidad del sistema sanitario de nuestro país y se alinea con las medidas que, sin reducir la calidad asistencial, estén encaminadas a asegurar su sostenibilidad. Desde la publicación del anterior posicionamiento la Comisión Europea ha autorizado la comercialización de nuevos fármacos biosimilares, lo que abre una excelente oportunidad de avanzar en la eficiencia de la atención sanitaria. En este nuevo escenario de incremento de la oferta terapéutica de biológicos, la SER considera imprescindible preservar la libertad de prescripción de los médicos que realizan la indicación de fármacos basándose exclusivamente en las características y circunstancias individuales de cada paciente, sin olvidar los aspectos económicos que se derivan de dicha actuación. In 2015 the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (Sociedad Española de Reumatología [SER]) published its position paper on biosimilar drugs. In this update, the SER, continues to manifest its unequivocal commitment to the sustainability of the health system of our country and is aligned with the measures that, without reducing quality of care, are aimed at ensuring its continuity. Since the publication of the previous position paper, the European Commission has authorized new biosimilar drugs, which provides an excellent opportunity to advance the efficiency of health care. In this new scenario of increased therapeutic offer of biologics, the SER considers it crucial to preserve the freedom of prescription of physicians who prescribe drugs based exclusively on the characteristics and individual circumstances of each patient, without forgetting the economic aspects there of. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Central lines are essential vascular access devices that can be associated with bloodstream infections. • This position paper overviews the techniques relevent to the insertion of these devices and procedures to maintain the catheter. • The paper also underscores the differences in management problems between high and middle to low income countries and between adults and children. • This paper also overviews the diagnosis and choice of antimicrobials in the treatment of central line-associated bloodstream infections. A panel of experts was convened by the International Society for Infectious Diseases (ISID) to overview recommendations on managing and preventing vascular catheter infections, specifically for the prevention and management of central line-associated bloodstream infections. These recommendations are intended to provide insight for healthcare professionals regarding the prevention of infection in the placement and maintenance of the catheter and diagnosis as well as treatment of catheter infection. Aspects of this area in pediatrics and in limited-resource situations and a discussion regarding the selection of empiric or targeted antimicrobial therapy are particular strengths of this position paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract With the increase of ageing population, rates of chronic diseases and complex medical conditions, the management of high-risk surgical patients is likely to become a great concern in most countries. Considering all these factors, it is certainly rational and intuitive that internists should be included into a collaborative model of medical and surgical co-management, where their multi-potentiality and synthesis capacity require them to coordinate the multidisciplinary team and to be the leading agent of change. In this regard, our aim was to present the official position and approach of the Working Group on Professional Issues and Quality of Care of the European Federation of Internal Medicine (EFIM), for implementation of this strategy of care, encouraging internists to assume an important role and to provide continuity of multidisciplinary care, from the decision to operate through to rehabilitation and recovery. Moving from the traditional model of medical care of the surgical patients to the co-management model, from a reactive simple consultation to a new pro-active continued service, may optimize the quality and perioperative care, improving the survival, shortening hospital stays, replacing the old strategy of late and complication treatment to an early and preventive one. Highlights • Co – management is a strategy to improve efficiency of care in surgical wards. • It is based on the written agreement between surgeon and co-managing internist. • The roles and responsibilities between them are clearly defined. • Evidence based results showed that co-management model improved clinical outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background and aim The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) aims to further develop its role in international medical and scientific guidance in the field of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, where many types of guidance documents exist. The ESCMID Executive Committee and the Clinical Microbiology and Infection (CMI) editorial board wish to clarify the terminology and format to be used in ESCMID guidance documents submitted for publication in CMI , and to highlight the principles behind ESCMID guidance documents. Types of guidance documents There are five types of ESCMID guidance documents: White Papers, Clinical Practice Guidelines, Consensus Statements, State-of-the-Science Statements, and Position Papers. They differ in scope, methods of development, drafting group composition and preferred publication format. Guidance documents can be proposed, developed and published by ESCMID Study Groups, Committees and individual members; often, other scientific societies are involved. The full disclosure of potential conflicts of interest of all drafting group members is a requirement. Final remarks Guidance documents constitute a common cultural and scientific background to people in the same and related professions. Also, they are an important educational and training tool. Developing a guidance document is a scientific endeavour, where a sound and transparent development process is needed, requiring multidisciplinary and personal skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presented the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of Rabies vaccines excerpted from the Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper – April 2018 published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] This position paper replaces the 2010 WHO position paper on rabies vaccines [2] . It presents new evidence in the field of rabies and the use of rabies vaccines, focussing on programmatic feasibility, simplification of vaccination schedules and improved cost-effectiveness. The recommendations concern the 2 main immunization strategies, namely vaccination for post-exposure prophylaxis and vaccination for pre-exposure prophylaxis. In the context of post-exposure prophylaxis, recommendations are also provided on the use of rabies immunoglobulins. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation tables. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in October 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Active surveillance (AS) represents a well-recognized management option for many patients with low- and very low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). AS aims to reduce overtreatment whilst ensuring curative treatment for those in whom it is needed, without losing the window of curability. While long-term series have confirmed the safety of AS in carefully selected patients, this has resulted in new clinical questions. Can the inclusion criteria be expanded? Is there a role for biomarkers and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at diagnosis or during AS? What is the optimal follow-up schedule as well as the most meaningful trigger for definitive treatment? These questions, together with increasingly adopted heterogeneous protocols in AS, have prompted the European Association of Urology to produce a position paper corroborated by a summary of the scientific background on AS. Patient summary Active surveillance (AS) is becoming a widely adopted strategy for patients affected by low-risk prostate cancer. While a formal systematic review on the topic will soon be available, the European Association of Urology has produced specific statements for different open questions on AS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Statins are the most common drugs administered for patients with cardiovascular disease. However, due to statin-associated muscle symptoms, adherence to statin therapy is challenging in clinical practice. Certain nutraceuticals, such as red yeast rice, bergamot, berberine, artichoke, soluble fiber, and plant sterols and stanols alone or in combination with each other, as well as with ezetimibe, might be considered as an alternative or add-on therapy to statins, although there is still insufficient evidence available with respect to long-term safety and effectiveness on cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. These nutraceuticals could exert significant lipid-lowering activity and might present multiple non-lipid-lowering actions, including improvement of endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness, as well as anti-inflammatory and antioxidative properties. The aim of this expert opinion paper is to provide the first attempt at recommendation on the management of statin intolerance through the use of nutraceuticals with particular attention on those with effective low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radical treatment of localised prostate cancer is recognised to be an unnecessary intervention or overtreatment in many men. Consequently, there has been a rapid uptake in the use of focal ablative therapies. However, there are several biological and practical concerns about such approaches as they have yet to be proved as robust treatment options. In particular, the multifocal nature of prostate cancer argues against unifocal treatment, while limitations in imaging can preclude the accurate identification of the number, location, and extent of prostate cancer foci. To date, a number of ablative options have reported results on mainly low-risk disease. Most series are relatively immature, with a lack of consistent follow-up, and the morbidity of retreatment is often not considered. The authors consider focal therapy to be an investigational modality, and encourage prospective recording of outcomes and recruitment of suitable patients. Patient summary Focal therapy of prostate cancer is the targeted destruction of cancer within a specific part of the prostate gland, sparing the rest of the prostate and nearby tissue. This procedure could potentially reduce side effects when compared with established standard treatments, such as surgery or radiotherapy, which treat the entire prostate. Studies show that for most men with low-risk cancer, active surveillance is the preferred treatment option. However, the available data regarding all forms of focal therapy are still poor and inconclusive. Consequently, due to both the lack of clear results associated with focal therapy and the difficulties in detecting all cancerous areas of the prostate, focal therapy should be considered an investigational modality only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC-KP) has become one of the most important contemporary pathogens, especially in endemic areas. Aims To provide practical suggestion for physicians dealing with the management of KPC-KP infections in critically ill patients, based on expert opinions. Sources PubMed search for relevant publications related to the management of KPC-KP infections. Contents A panel of experts developed a list of 12 questions to be addressed. In view of the current lack of high-level evidence, they were asked to provide answers on the bases of their knowledge and experience in the field. The panel identified several key aspects to be addressed when dealing with KPC-KP in critically ill patients (preventing colonization in the patient, preventing infection in the colonized patient and colonization of his or her contacts, reducing mortality in the infected patient by rapidly diagnosing the causative agent and promptly adopting the best therapeutic strategy) and provided related suggestions that were based on the available observational literature and the experience of panel members. Implications Diagnostic technologies could speed up the diagnosis of KPC-KP infections. Combination treatment should be preferred to monotherapy in cases of severe infections. For non–critically ill patients without severe infections, results from randomized clinical trials are needed for ultimately weighing benefits and costs of using combinations rather than monotherapy. Multifaceted infection control interventions are needed to decrease the rates of colonization and cross-transmission of KPC-KP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oncology has come a long way in addressing patients' quality of life, together with developing surgical, radio-oncological and medical anticancer therapies. However, the multiple and varying needs of patients are still not beingmet adequately as part of routine cancer care. Supportive and palliative care interventions should be integrated, dynamic, personalised and based on best evidence. They should start at the time of diagnosis and continue through to end-of-life or survivorship. ESMO is committed to excellence in all aspects of oncological care during the continuum of the cancer experience. Following the 2003 ESMO stand on supportive and palliative care (Cherny N, Catane R, Kosmidis P. ESMO takes a stand on supportive and palliative care. Ann Oncol 2003; 14(9): 1335-1337), this position paper highlights the evolving and growing gap between the needs of cancer patients and the actual provision of care. The concept of patient-centred cancer care is presented along with key requisites and areas for further work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The optimal duration of osteoporosis treatment is controversial. As opposed to bisphosphonates, denosumab does not incorporate into bone matrix and bone turnover is not suppressed after its cessation. Recent reports imply that denosumab discontinuation may lead to an increased risk of multiple vertebral fractures. Methods The European Calcified Tissue Society (ECTS) formed a working group to perform a systematic review of existing literature on the effects of stopping denosumab and provide advice on management. Results Data from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials underscore a rapid decrease of bone mineral density (BMD) and a steep increase in bone turnover markers (BTMs) after discontinuation of denosumab. Clinical case series report multiple vertebral fractures after discontinuation of denosumab and a renewed analysis of FREEDOM and FREEDOM Extension Trial suggests, albeit does not prove, that the risk of multiple vertebral fractures may be increased when denosumab is stopped due to a rebound increase in bone resorption. Conclusion There appears to be an increased risk of multiple vertebral fractures after discontinuation of denosumab although strong evidence for such an effect and for measures to prevent the occurring bone loss is lacking. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this potential risk. Based on available data, a re-evaluation should be performed after 5 years of denosumab treatment. Patients considered at high fracture risk should either continue denosumab therapy for up to 10 years or be switched to an alternative treatment. For patients at low risk, a decision to discontinue denosumab could be made after 5 years, but bisphosphonate therapy should be considered to reduce or prevent the rebound increase in bone turnover. However, since the optimal bisphosphonate regimen post-denosumab is currently unknown continuation of denosumab can also be considered until results from ongoing trials become available. Based on current data, denosumab should not be stopped without considering alternative treatment in order to prevent rapid BMD loss and a potential rebound in vertebral fracture risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines excerpted from the Hepatitis B vaccines: WHO position paper, July 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Hepatitis B vaccines, 2017) [1]. This position paper replaces the May 2009 WHO position paper on hepatitis B vaccines (Hepatitis B vaccines, 2009) [2]. The position paper gives updated information on hepatitis B vaccines and their storage, transport and deployment. The recommendations concern the target groups for vaccination and the appropriate schedules. In particular, the recommendations stress the importance of vaccination of all infants at birth as the most effective intervention for the prevention of hepatitis B virus-associated disease worldwide. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/October/presentations_background_docs/en/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines excerpted from the Cholera vaccines: WHO position paper, August 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Cholera vaccine, 2017) [1] . This position paper replaces the 2010 WHO position paper on cholera vaccines (Cholera vaccine, 2010) [2] . It incorporates the most recent evidence on cholera vaccination and provides revised recommendations on the target populations for cholera immunization. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in April 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/April/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of diphtheria vaccines excerpted from the Diphtheria vaccines: WHO position paper, August 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Diphtheria vaccine, 2017) [1] . This position paper replaces the 2006 WHO position paper on diphtheria vaccine (Diphtheria vaccine, 2006) [2] . The position paper incorporates recent evidence on diphtheria and provides revised recommendations on the optimal number of doses and timing of diphtheria vaccination. In view of the widespread use of combination vaccines, it provides guidance on the alignment of vaccination schedules for different antigens included in routine childhood immunization programmes. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of diphtheria vaccines were discussed by SAGE in April 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/april/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain health is an evolving concept that has become increasingly popular within clinical and academic centers, journalism and the general public. It can be defined as the state of brain functioning across cognitive, sensory, social-emotional, behavioural and motor domains, allowing a person to realize their full potential over the life course. Multiple, interconnected determinants play a role in shaping brain health from pre-conception through the end of life. Brain health can be optimized by addressing the following determinants: physical health, healthy environments, safety and security, learning and social connection, and access to quality services. Optimizing brain health improves brain structure and functioning across all domains and benefits health by lowering rates of neurological disorders, mental health conditions, and substance use; improving quality of life for people with lived experience of these conditions; and improving physical health (particularly through improved endocrine and immunological functioning and lower rates of stress-related physical health conditions). Additionally, optimizing brain health can lead to social and economic benefits including increased school retention and academic achievement, lower rates of teenage pregnancies, lower rates of incarceration, lower health care costs and rates of disability, higher productivity, and greater wealth. Optimizing brain health for all is paramount to ensuring human health and well-being globally. It is central to achieving global commitments outlined in the Intersectoral global action plan on epilepsy and other neurological disorders 2022–2031, WHO's Triple Billion targets, the UN SDGs and the 2021 Geneva Charter for Well-being. Efforts to optimize brain health require multi-stakeholder collaborations and must be integrated across all sectors of society: health and social care; education; legislature and governance; finance and economy; employment; infrastructure, urban planning and housing; and ecology, nature and climate. In return, robust investments in actions that optimize brain health across the life course promise to improve multiple health outcomes and lift development and well-being globally. Multisectoral engagement and collaboration are urgently needed in order to move the brain health agenda forward for all people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Telemedicine is the provision of health care services, through the use of information and communication technology, in situations where the health care professional and the patient, or 2 health care professionals, are not in the same location. It involves the secure transmission of medical data and information, through text, sound, images, or other forms needed for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of a patient. First data on implementation of telemedicine for the diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial infarction date from more than 10 years ago. Telemedicine has a potential broad application to the cardiovascular disease continuum and in many branches of cardiology, at least including heart failure, ischemic heart disease and arrhythmias. Telemedicine might have an important role as part of a strategy for the delivery of effective health care for patients with cardiovascular disease. In this document the Working Group on Telecardiology and Informatics of the Italian Society of Cardiology intends to remark some key-points regarding potential benefit achievable with the implementation of telemedicine support in the continuum of cardiovascular disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The terms consensus, guideline and position paper are sometimes employed as if they were interchangeable, but the purpose of such documents and the robustness of advice vary as the evidence base does not have the same depth in each. The Board of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society deemed it to be helpful to provide a short commentary on the definition of these terms, on their interconnections and on how ECFS considers them in documents endorsed by the society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of an increasing life expectancy, the incidence of cancer cases diagnosed in the older population is rising. Indeed, cancer incidence is 11-fold higher in persons over the age of 65 than in younger ones. Despite this high incidence of cancer in older patients, solid data regarding the most appropriate approach and best treatment for older cancer patients are still lacking, mostly due to under-representation of these patients in prospective clinical trials. The clinical behaviour of common malignant diseases, e.g. breast, ovarian and lung cancers, lymphomas and acute leukaemias, may be different in older patients because of intrinsic variation of the neoplastic cells and the ability of the tumour host to support neoplastic growth. The decision to treat or not these patients should be based on patients’ functional age rather than the chronological age. Assessment of patients’ functional age includes the evaluation of health, functional status, nutrition, cognition and the psychosocial and economic context. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the influence of age on cancer presentation and cancer management in older cancer patients and to provide suggestions on clinical trial development and methodology in this population. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Hormonal therapy (HT) is one of the most frequently prescribed drug regimens for women after the age of 50 years. HT has been developed progressively since the 1960s to provide estrogen to those women (a) who require relief of symptoms which have resulted from reduced circulating estrogen or (b) to act as an anti-resorptive agent to counteract the effect of the increased bone turnover which occurs with falling menopausal estrogen levels and which results in loss of bone mass leading to postmenopausal osteoporosis. However, a large number of women pass through the menopausal transition without experiencing distress as a result of the natural fall in estrogen hormone levels and since the introduction HT has been thought to be associated with a number of health benefits that have been tested in clinical trials but not substantiated. In women experiencing distressing climacteric symptoms double-blind randomised controlled clinical trials with a variety of HT regimens have shown that HT of any type provides symptom relief with no alternative treatment of similar effect. The dose and regimen of HT need to be individualised and in general the appropriate dose is dependent on the menopausal age. Women experiencing urogenital estrogen deficiency symptoms require long-term treatment which is most easily achieved with local estrogen.. With the perspective provided by the most recent epidemiological findings not least from the estrogen only arm of the Women’s Health Initiative Study (WHI) EMAS supports research activities generating HT with new compositions including lower doses and a wider range of progestins in order to positively affect the balance of clinical benefit and risk. Currently, however, individualized and appropriate prescription of the available HT products together with life-style management will sustain possibilities for beneficial effects on climacteric symptoms, quality of life and degenerative diseases after the menopause. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of rabies vaccines excerpted from the recently published Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Rabies vaccines WHO position paper published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in December 2007. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of measles vaccines excerpted from the recently published measles vaccines: WHO position paper. This revised WHO position paper on measles vaccines replaces the corresponding paper published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in March 2004. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international impact on public health. These papers, which are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes, summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with the current WHO position concerning their use in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) updated recommendations on the use of meningococcal vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Meningococcal A conjugate vaccine: updated guidance, February 2015, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . A position paper on meningococcal vaccines was published in 2011 and its recommendations remain valid [2] . This update adds to the previous recommendations specifically concerning routine immunization of infants and young children in the African meningitis belt with meningococcal A conjugate vaccine. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of the Meningococcal A conjugate vaccine were discussed by SAGE in October 2014; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations for the use of varicella and herpes zoster vaccination from the WHO position paper on varicella and herpes zoster vaccines – June 2014, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the use of varicella and herpes zoster vaccines. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of varicella vaccines published in 1998 [2] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2014 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of yellow fever (YF) vaccination from “Vaccines and vaccination against yellow fever: WHO Position Paper – June 2013” published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the use of YF vaccination, in particular that a single dose of YF vaccine is sufficient to confer sustained life-long protective immunity against YF disease. A booster dose is not necessary. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of yellow fever vaccines and vaccination published in 2003 [2] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2013 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination from the WHO position paper on H. influenzae type b (Hib) Vaccination – July 2013 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the inclusion of Hib vaccines in all national immunization programmes, recent developments in the field and the potential of different Hib immunization schedules to further reduce morbidity and mortality. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of Hib vaccines published in 2006 [2]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2013 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations on the use of pneumococcal vaccines excerpted from the Pneumococcal vaccines WHO position paper – 2012 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record . The current document replaces the position paper on the use 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine published in 2007 . Incorporating the most recent developments in the field of pneumococcal vaccines this position paper focuses on the currently available 10-valent and 13-valent conjugate vaccines and their introduction and use in national immunization programmes. It also deals with the 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine, though in less detail than provided in the April 2008 position paper which remains valid . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of scientific evidence for a few key conclusions. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines worldwide. This paper reflects the recommendations of the WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. Recommendations on the use of pneumococcal vaccines were discussed by SAGE at its meetings in November 2006 (conjugate vaccine) and April 2008 (polysaccharide vaccine) and most recently in November 2011. Evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of vaccines against tick-borne encephalitis excerpted from the recently published Vaccines against tick-borne encephalitis: WHO position paper. This is the first WHO position paper on the use of tick-borne encephalitis. It was published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in June 2011. In this paper, footnotes provide a limited number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of scientific evidence for a few key conclusions; a more comprehensive list of references is offered in the Background document on vaccines and vaccination against tick-borne encephalitis available at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/6_TBE_backgr_18_Mar_net_apr_2011.pdf. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2011 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of pertussis vaccines excerpted from the recently published Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in January 2005. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of polio vaccines excerpted from the recently published Polio vaccines and polio immunization in the pre-eradication era: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine into oral poliovirus vaccine-using countries published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in July 2003. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines excerpted from the recently published Cholera vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper on Cholera vaccines published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in April 2001. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization (SAGE). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines excerpted from the recently published Hepatitis B vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper on hepatitis B vaccines published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in July 2004. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables assessing the level of scientific evidence are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health-policy matters, WHO is issuing a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with the current WHO position concerning their use in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s strategic Advisory Group of experts on immunization. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The WHO Position Paper on Vaccines against Human Papillomavirus (HPV): This article presents the WHO recommendations for use of the HPV vaccine excerpted from the recently published WHO Position on HPV Vaccines. These recommendations were formulated in a multiyear collaboration involving internal and external experts in the field, culminating in production of a detailed Background paper summarizing the evidence. After a series of meetings and careful consideration of the evidence for HPV vaccine introduction, WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on vaccines and immunization recommended use of HPV vaccine in November 2008. WHO published a complete position paper in April 2009, which presents the WHO Position. Additional evidence including a detailed Background paper summarizing the evidence last presented to SAGE is available at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of polio vaccination from the WHO position paper on polio vaccines - January 2014 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the introduction of at least one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into routine immunization schedules as a strategy to mitigate the potential risk of re-emergence of type 2 polio following the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 strains from oral polio vaccine (OPV). The current document replaces the position paper on the use of polio vaccines published in 2010 [2]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its November 2013 meeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]