Search

A rapid systematic review, based on Cochrane rapid review methodology was conducted to assess the effectiveness of two 10μg doses of BNT162b2 vaccine in preventing morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 in children aged 5 to 11 years. We searched the Cochrane Library COVID-19 study register, the COVID-NMA living review database and the McMaster University Living Evidence Synthesis for pre-appraised trials and observational studies up to 7 December 2022. Records were screened independently in duplicate. Where appraisal was not available, these were done in duplicate. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 presenting risk ratios/odds ratios/inverse vaccine efficacy with 95% confidence intervals (CI). GRADE for assessing the overall certainty of the evidence was done in Gradepro. We screened 403 records and assessed 52 full-text articles for eligibility. One randomised controlled trial (RCT) and 24 observational studies were included. The RCT reported that BNT162b2 was likely safe and 91% efficacious, RR 0.09 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32) against incident COVID-19 infection (moderate certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this is 19 fewer cases per 1,000 vaccines delivered (ranging from 15 to 21 fewer cases). Observational studies reported vaccine effectiveness (VE) against incident COVID-19 infection of 65% (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.47) and 76% against hospitalisation (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.42) (moderate certainty evidence). The absolute effect is 167 fewer cases per 1,000 vaccines given (ranging from 130 fewer to 196 fewer cases) and 4 fewer hospitalisations per 10,000 children (from 3 fewer to 5 fewer hospitalisations). Adverse events following vaccination with BNT162b2 were mild or moderate and transient. The evidence demonstrated a reduction in incident COVID-19 cases and small absolute reduction in hospitalisation if a two-dose BNT162b2 vaccine regimen is offered to children aged 5 to 11 years, compared to placebo. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021286710.

INTRODUCTION:Warfarin is the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant in sub-Saharan Africa and requires ongoing monitoring. The burden of both infectious diseases and non-communicable diseases is high and medicines used to treat comorbidities may interact with warfarin. We describe service provision, patient characteristics, and anticoagulation control at selected anticoagulation clinics in Uganda and South Africa. METHODS:We evaluated two outpatient anticoagulation services in Kampala, Uganda and three in Cape Town, South Africa between 1 January and 31 July 2018. We collected information from key staff members about the clinics' service provision and extracted demographic and clinical data from a sample of patients' clinic records. We calculated time in therapeutic range (TTR) over the most recent 3-month period using the Rosendaal interpolation method. RESULTS:We included three tertiary level, one secondary level and one primary level anticoagulation service, seeing between 30 and 800 patients per month. Care was rendered by nurses, medical officers, and specialists. All healthcare facilities had on-site pharmacies; laboratory INR testing was off-site at two. Three clinics used warfarin dose-adjustment protocols; these were not validated for local use. We reviewed 229 patient clinical records. Most common indications for warfarin were venous thrombo-embolism in 112/229 (49%), atrial fibrillation in 74/229 (32%) and valvular heart disease in 30/229 (13%). Patients were generally followed up monthly. HIV prevalence was 20% and 5% at Ugandan and South African clinics respectively. Cardiovascular comorbidity predominated. Furosemide, paracetamol, enalapril, simvastatin, and tramadol were the most common concomitant drugs. Anticoagulation control was poor at all included clinics with median TTR of 41% (interquartile range 14% to 69%). CONCLUSIONS:TTR was suboptimal at all included sites, despite frequent patient follow-up. Strategies to improve INR control in sub-Saharan patients taking warfarin are needed. Locally validated warfarin dosing algorithms in Uganda and South Africa may improve INR control.

INTRODUCTION:Estimating the incidence of antiretroviral discontinuations due to adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is important to inform antiretroviral treatment (ART) regimen recommendations, and to guide prescribing and monitoring policies. Routinely collected clinical data is a useful source of pharmacovigilance data. We estimated the incidences of first-line antiretroviral discontinuations due to ADRs using routine clinical data, and compared them with incidences estimated using data enhanced by folder review, in two South African cohorts. METHODS:We included patients 16 years and older on first-line ART. We selected a stratified random sample of 25% for checking of ART prescription data and reasons for antiretroviral discontinuations retrospectively, including folders reviews where required (enhanced-data sample). We estimated the incidence of antiretroviral discontinuations using Kaplan-Meier and competing risk analyses. RESULTS:In 15396 patients, 40% had a first-line antiretroviral discontinuation by three years on ART. We could determine the reason for 65% of discontinuations using routine data only, and 84% of discontinuations, in the enhanced-data sample of 3837 patients. ADR was the most common reason for discontinuations. In the enhanced-data sample, the cumulative incidence of discontinuations due to ADRs by three years was 30.4% (95% CI: 24.4-36.6) for stavudine; 2.0% (95% CI: 1.5-2.6) for tenofovir, and 1.3% (95% CI: 0.8-2.1) for efavirenz. Using routine data only, the cumulative incidences of discontinuations due to ADRs by three years for stavudine, tenofovir, and efavirenz respectively were 23.9% (95% CI: 20.3-27.7), 1.2% (95% CI: 0.9-1.4) and 0.5% (95% CI: 0.3-0.7). CONCLUSIONS:Although the relative rankings were similar using routine or enhanced data, lack of checking for missing reasons for discontinuation resulted in underestimates of the incidence of antiretroviral discontinuations due to ADRs. Systems to improve data collection of reasons for regimen changes prospectively would increase the capacity of routine data to answer pharmacovigilance questions.

INTRODUCTION:A new method to assess causality of suspected adverse drug reactions, the Liverpool Adverse Drug Reaction Causality Assessment Tool (LCAT), showed high interrater agreement when used by its developers. Our aim was to compare the interrater agreement achieved by LCAT to that achieved by another causality assessment method, the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre system for standardised case causality assessment (WHO-UMC system), in our setting. METHODS:Four raters independently assessed adverse drug reaction causality of 48 drug-event pairs, identified during a hospital-based survey. A randomised design ensured that no washout period was required between assessments with the two methods. We compared the methods' interrater agreement by calculating agreement proportions, kappa statistics, and the intraclass correlation coefficient. We identified potentially problematic questions in the LCAT by comparing raters' responses to individual questions. RESULTS:Overall unweighted kappa was 0.61 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.80) on the WHO-UMC system and 0.27 (95% CI 0.074 to 0.46) on the LCAT. Pairwise unweighted Cohen kappa ranged from 0.33 to 1.0 on the WHO-UMC system and from 0.094 to 0.71 on the LCAT. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.92) on the WHO-UMC system and 0.61 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.77) on the LCAT. Two LCAT questions were identified as significant points of disagreement. DISCUSSION:We were unable to replicate the high interrater agreement achieved by the LCAT developers and instead found its interrater agreement to be lower than that achieved when using the WHO-UMC system. We identified potential reasons for this and recommend priority areas for improving the LCAT.

There are a limited number of paediatric antiretroviral drug options. Characterising the long term safety and durability of different antiretrovirals in children is important to optimise management of HIV infected children and to determine the estimated need for alternative drugs in paediatric regimens. We describe first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) durability and reasons for discontinuations in children at two South African ART programmes, where lopinavir/ritonavir has been recommended for children

We determined the prevalence and correlates of low bone mineral density (BMD) in HIV-infected South Africans as there is a paucity of such data from Africa.BMD and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D were measured in HIV-positive participants on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and in those not yet on ART (ART-naïve).We enrolled 444 participants [median age 35(IQR: 30, 40) years; 77% women]. BMD was low (z score

BACKGROUND: Lipoatrophy and/or central fat gain are observed frequently in patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Both are assumed to be antiretroviral adverse drug reactions. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to determine whether fat loss or gain was more common in HIV-infected patients on ART than in uninfected controls; was associated with specific antiretrovirals; and would reverse after switching antiretrovirals. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. One cohort study reported more lipoatrophy, less subcutaneous fat gain, but no difference in central fat gain in HIV-infected patients on ART than in controls. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed more limb fat loss (or less fat gain) with the following regimens: stavudine (versus other nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs)); efavirenz (versus protease inhibitors (PIs)); and NRTI-containing (versus NRTI-sparing). RCTs showed increased subcutaneous fat after switching to NRTI-sparing regimens or from stavudine/zidovudine to abacavir/tenofovir. There were no significant between-group differences in trunk and/or visceral fat gain in RCTs of various regimens, but results from efavirenz versus PI regimens were inconsistent. There was no significant between-group differences in central fat gain in RCTs switched to NRTI-sparing regimens, or from PI-containing regimens. CONCLUSIONS: There is clear evidence of a causal relationship between NRTIs (especially thymidine analogues) and lipoatrophy, with concomitant PIs possibly having an ameliorating effect or efavirenz causing additive toxicity. By contrast, central fat gain appears to be a consequence of treating HIV infection, because it is not different from controls, is not linked to any antiretroviral class, and doesn't improve on switching.