Search

Knockdown resistance ( kdr) and CYP9K1 genotypes were detected by a MOLDI-TOF based SNP genotyping assay (Sequenom iPLEX) in samples of Anopheles gambiae collected at 13 sites throughout the Union of the Comoros and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania during February and March 2011. All A. gambiae specimens collected in the Comoros were homozygous for the susceptible kdr alleles (+/+) while 96% of A. gambiae from Dar es Salaam were homozygous for the East African kdr resistant genotype (E/E). In contrast, all specimens from Dar es Salaam and the Comoros were homozygous for the cyp3 allele (c3/c3) at the CYP9K1 locus; the locus has been implicated in metabolic resistance against pyrethroid insecticides in West Africa. All specimens had typical A. gambiae genotypes for SNPs within the divergence Islands on all three chromosomes. Although further spatial and temporal studies are needed, the distribution of kdr genotypes between the Comoros and Tanzania further supports isolation of the Comoros populations from A. gambiae populations on mainland Africa .

Background: We established cohorts to assess associations between viral influenza and cognitive development to inform the value proposition of vaccination. Methods: From 2014 through 2017, we called women seeking care at four prenatal clinics in Panama and El Salvador to identify acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs). Within 2 weeks of childbirth, mothers were asked to enroll their neonates in the cognitive development study. Staff obtained nasopharyngeal swabs from children with febrile ARIs for real‐time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rtPCR) detection of viral RNA. Toddlers were administered Bayley developmental tests at ages 12 and 18–24 months. We used multilevel linear regression to explore associations between Bayley scores, ARIs, fever, and laboratory‐confirmed influenza, controlling for maternal respiratory or Zika illnesses, infant influenza vaccination, birth during influenza epidemics, and the number of children in households. Results: We enrolled 1567 neonates of which 68% (n = 1062) underwent developmental testing once and 40% (n = 623) twice. Children with previous ARIs scored an average of 3 points lower on their cognitive scores than children without ARIs (p = 0.001). Children with previous fevers scored an average of 2.1 points lower on their cognitive scores than afebrile children (p = 0.02). In the second year, children with previous laboratory‐confirmed influenza scored 4 points lower on their cognitive scores than children without influenza (p = 0.04, after controlling for first Bayley cognitive scores). Conclusions: ARIs and fever during infancy were associated with lower Bayley scores at 12 months, and laboratory‐confirmed influenza was associated with lower cognitive scores at 24 months suggesting the potential value of vaccination to prevent non‐respiratory complications of influenza. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An empirical review and critique of existing state standards for batterer programs in the domestic violence field appeared timely, given the current debate about their status and utility. Although there has been a considerable amount of polemic discussion of the topic, relatively limited data have been reported. The present article surveyed the content of standards developed in 30 states within the United States. Five categories of interest were examined including: (1) the minimum length of treatment specified: (2) specification of treatment orientation, methods, and content: (3) preferred or allowable modalities of treatment; (4) whether research findings were mentioned or endorsed as a basis for development of treatment standards: and (5) methods for developing and revising standards. A related area, the minimum education required for providers, was also included as an area of interest to further describe the current pool of practitioners targeted for regulation. An analysis of the content of these standards was then performed with regard to existing peer-reviewed research in the field. The results are discussed in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of current standards, the areas in which further research is needed, and specific recommendations regarding steps that might be taken to improve existing efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Stephanie A. Irving reports support from Westat to Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research. Nicola P. Klein reports support from Pfizer to Kaiser Permanente, Northern California for COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, and institutional support from Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Sanofi Pasteur outside the current study. Charlene McEvoy reports support from AstraZeneca to HealthPartners Institute for COVID-19 vaccine trials. Allison L. Naleway reports Pfizer Research funding to Kaiser Permanente Northwest for unrelated study of meningococcal B vaccine safety during pregnancy. Suchitra Rao reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline and Biofire Diagnostics. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Immunocompromised persons, defined as those with suppressed humoral or cellular immunity resulting from health conditions or medications, account for approximately 3% of the U.S. adult population (1). Immunocompromised adults are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes (2) and might not acquire the same level of protection from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as do immunocompetent adults (3,4). To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) among immunocompromised adults, data from the VISION Network* on hospitalizations among persons aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness from 187 hospitals in nine states during January 17-September 5, 2021 were analyzed. Using selected discharge diagnoses, † VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization conferred by completing a 2-dose series of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the index hospitalization date § (i.e., being fully vaccinated) was evaluated using a test-negative design comparing 20,101 immunocompromised adults (10,564 [53%] of whom were fully vaccinated) and 69,116 immunocompetent adults (29,456 [43%] of whom were fully vaccinated). VE of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was lower among immunocompromised patients (77%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-80%) than among immunocompetent patients (90%; 95% CI = 89%-91%). This difference persisted irrespective of mRNA vaccine product, age group, and timing of hospitalization relative to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance in the state of hospitalization. VE varied across immunocompromising condition subgroups, ranging from 59% (organ or stem cell transplant recipients) to 81% (persons with a rheumatologic or inflammatory disorder). Immunocompromised persons benefit from mRNA COVID-19 vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons, and VE varies among immunocompromised subgroups. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations (5), practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Allison L. Naleway reports institutional support from Pfizer outside the submitted work. Anupam B. Kharbanda reports institutional support through HealthPartners to Children’s Minnesota for VISION. Charlene McEvoy reports institutional support from AstraZeneca for the AZD1222 COVID-19 vaccine trial. Jill Ferdinands reports travel support from Institute for Influenza Epidemiology, funded in part by Sanofi Pasteur. Nicola P. Klein reports institutional support from Pfizer for COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials and institutional support from Pfizer, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur, and Protein Sciences (now Sanofi Pasteur) outside the submitted work. Suchitra Rao reports grant support from GlaxoSmithKline and Biofire Diagnostics. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.