Search

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccines comprising ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 (WH1) and the Omicron BA.1 or BA.5 subvariant elicit enhanced serum antibody responses to emerging Omicron subvariants. Here, we characterized the RBD-specific memory B cell (Bmem) response following a fourth dose with a BA.1 or BA.5 bivalent vaccine, in direct comparison with a WH1 monovalent fourth dose. Healthcare workers previously immunized with mRNA or adenoviral vector monovalent vaccines were sampled before and one month after a fourth dose with a monovalent or a BA.1 or BA.5 bivalent vaccine. Serum neutralizing antibodies (NAb) were quantified, as well as RBD-specific Bmem with an in-depth spectral flow cytometry panel including recombinant RBD proteins of the WH1, BA.1, BA.5, BQ.1.1, and XBB.1.5 variants. Both bivalent vaccines elicited higher NAb titers against Omicron subvariants compared to the monovalent vaccine. Following either vaccine type, recipients had slightly increased WH1 RBD-specific Bmem numbers. Both bivalent vaccines significantly increased WH1 RBD-specific Bmem binding of all Omicron subvariants tested by flow cytometry, while recognition of Omicron subvariants was not enhanced following monovalent vaccination. IgG1+ Bmem dominated the response, with substantial IgG4+ Bmem only detected in recipients of an mRNA vaccine for their primary dose. Thus, Omicron-based bivalent vaccines can significantly boost NAb and Bmem specific for ancestral WH1 and Omicron variants and improve recognition of descendent subvariants by pre-existing, WH1-specific Bmem beyond that of a monovalent vaccine. This provides new insights into the capacity of variant-based mRNA booster vaccines to improve immune memory against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and potentially protect against severe disease. Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 bivalent COVID-19 boosters, used as a fourth dose, increase RBD-specific Bmem cross-recognition of Omicron subvariants, both those encoded by the vaccines and antigenically distinct subvariants, further than a monovalent booster. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Travellers visiting rabies-endemic countries are at risk of rabies infection. Assessing travellers' knowledge and risk perception of rabies and risk behaviour during travel can help identify knowledge gaps and improve pre-travel risk education. Cohort study in Dutch adult travellers, using two surveys: one before travel to assess knowledge and perception of rabies, and one after return to identify risk behaviour during travel. The pre-travel and post-travel survey were completed by 301 and 276 participants, respectively. 222 participants had travelled to a high-risk rabies-endemic country. 21.6 % of the participants scored their rabies knowledge as poor. Some participants were unaware cats or bats can transmit rabies (26.6 % and 13.6 %, respectively), or that post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is required for certain exposures such as skin abrasions without bleeding or licks on damaged skin (35.5 % and 18.9 %, respectively), while 27.9 % of participants did not know PEP needs to be administered within one day. 115 participants (51.8 %) reported any form of contact with any animal during travel. Two participants reported animal exposure, of which one took adequate PEP measures. Risk factors for animal contact abroad were regularly touching cats or dogs at home or abroad, longer travel duration, having pets during childhood and being an animal lover. Pre-travel rabies risk education currently does not meet travellers' needs, which is reflected in knowledge gaps and engagement in risk behaviour during travel. During pre-travel health advice, avoiding animal contact abroad should be emphasized, and additional education is required about indications for PEP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Travelers can experience health problems while abroad. This descriptive study aimed to quantify the disease burden leading to hospital-based care, repatriation or death in Dutch travelers during a stay in a foreign country, including Europe. Retrospective study of demographic and clinical data from three medical assistance centers (MACs) and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Dutch travelers receiving hospital-based care or who died abroad in the years 2010–2014. Diagnoses were coded according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and classified using the Global Burden of Disease tool. Data was available for 77,741 travelers' incidents: 75,385 medical consultations and 2,356 deaths. Four in five travelers received inpatient care, of which 36% concerned older travelers (65+) who had significantly longer hospital stays. Overall the top three diagnoses were: injuries (29%), infectious diseases (17%), and cardiovascular diseases (17%). Mental illness was reported in nearly 1.5% of the travelers. Incidence proportions were highest in South-Eastern Asia, with enteric infections as most common diagnosis. Injuries and communicable diseases occurred most often in South-Eastern Asia, while non-communicable diseases were mostly reported in South America. One in five travelers who consulted a physician was repatriated back home, mostly on a scheduled flight with or without medical escort. Cardiovascular diseases and injuries were the leading causes of death. Not only communicable diseases, but also injuries and chronic diseases (in particular cardiovascular diseases) frequently affected travelers' health while staying abroad and frequently necessitated hospital-based care. This should be addressed during the pre-travel counseling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients under immunosuppressive therapy with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) antagonists are vulnerable to various opportunistic infections including leishmaniasis. We present a case series of 8 travellers developing cutaneous leishmaniasis whilst on TNF-α antagonist treatment and review the literature on aspects of cutaneous leishmaniasis developing in patients treated with TNF-α antagonists. We make interim recommendations regarding the drug therapy used to maintain remission in travellers with rheumatoid disease travelling to leishmania prone areas. Despite having a medical condition requiring continued rheumatological review the interval to diagnosis appears not to be reduced compared to that described in non-rheumatoid patients. Rheumatologists and family doctors should be aware of the need for post-travel surveillance for leishmaniasis in rheumatoid patients on TNF-alpha antagonist treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Unpreserved faecal samples, suspected to contain Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar cysts or trophozoites on the basis of microscopic examination, and serum samples from 416 patients were collected in a prospective study to determine whether stool antigen assays and detection of antibodies in serum are reliable methods to distinguish between carriers of E. histolytica and E. dispar in comparison to the reference test: real-time PCR. In 283 patients (68%) DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar was amplified by real-time PCR: 6 patients with amoebic colitis (2%), 19 carriers of E. histolytica (6.7%), and 258 carriers of E. dispar (91.2%). In 133 patients (31%) no DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar could be amplified in the stool samples. This patient group was used as control for the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Using real-time PCR as a reference test, the sensitivity and specificity of (1) the Entamoeba test™ for the diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar carrier were 59% and 98%, (2) E. histolytica II™ for the diagnosis of E. histolytica carrier was 71% and 100%, and (3) serology for the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection was 83.3% and 95.2%, respectively. Applied to carriers that did not originate from an endemic country the sensitivity of serology for E. histolytica infection was 90% and specificity was 98.8%. In comparison to real-time PCR the performances of Entamoeba test™ and E. histolytica II™ lacked sensitivity for a reliable diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar infection in a non-endemic setting. In carriers of E. histolytica/E. dispar from non-endemic countries the high specificity of serology can be used to establish the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection if antibodies are present. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Recently, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) and serious gaming interventions have been suggested to enhance accessibility to interventions and engagement in psychological interventions that aim to promote health outcomes. Few studies, however, have investigated their effectiveness in the context of simulated real-life challenges.Objective: We aimed to examine the effectivity of a guided ICBT combined with a serious gaming intervention in improving self-reported psychophysiological and immunological health endpoints in response to psychophysiological and immune-related challenges.Methods: Sixty-nine healthy men were randomly assigned to the intervention condition, receiving ICBT combined with serious gaming for 6 weeks, or the control condition, receiving no intervention. Self-reported vitality was the primary endpoint. Other self-reported psychophysiological and immunological endpoints were assessed following various challenges, including a bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccination evoking pro-inflammatory responses, 1 and 4 weeks after the intervention period.Results: Although the intervention did not affect vitality-associated parameters, self-reported sleep problems (P=.027) and bodily sensations (P=.042) were lower directly after the intervention compared with controls. Furthermore, wellbeing (P=.024) was higher in the intervention group after the psychophysiological challenges. Although no significant group differences were found for the psychophysiological and immunological endpoints, the data provided preliminary support for increased immunoglobulin antibody responses at the follow-up time points (P<.05). Differential chemokine endpoints between conditions were observed at the end of the test day.Conclusions: The present study provides some support for improving health endpoints with an innovative ICBT intervention. Future research should replicate and further extend the present findings by consistently including challenges and a wide range of immune parameters into the study design.Trial Registration: Nederlands Trial Register NTR5610; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5466. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]