Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of the national cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention programme—National Health Service Health Check (NHSHC) in reduction of CVD risk.DesignProspective cohort study.Setting147 primary care practices in Leicestershire and Northamptonshire in England, UK.Participants27 888 individuals undergoing NHSHC with a minimum of 18 months of follow-up data.Outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were NHSHC attributed detection of CVD risk factors, prescription of medications, changes in values of individual risk factors and frequency of follow-up.ResultsAt recruitment, 18% of participants had high CVD risk (10%–20% 10-year risk) and 4% very high CVD risk (>20% 10-year risk). New diagnoses or hypertension (HTN) was made in 2.3% participants, hypercholesterolaemia in 0.25% and diabetes mellitus in 0.9%. New prescription of stains and antihypertensive medications was observed in 5.4% and 5.4% of participants, respectively. Total cholesterol was decreased on average by 0.38 mmol/L (95% CI −0.34 to −0.41) and 1.71 mmol/L (−1.48 to −1.94) in patients with initial cholesterol >5 mmol/L and >7.5 mmol/L, respectively. Systolic blood pressure was decreased on average by 2.9 mm Hg (−2.3 to −3.7), 15.7 mm Hg (−14.1 to −17.5) and 33.4 mm Hg (−29.4 to −37.7), in patients with grade 1, 2 and 3 HTN, respectively. About one out of three patients with increased CVD risk had no record of follow-up or treatment.ConclusionsMajority of patients identified with increased CVD risk through the NHSHC were followed up and received effective clinical interventions. However, one-third of high CVD risk patients had no follow-up and therefore did not receive any treatment. Our study highlights areas of focus which could improve the effectiveness of the programme.Trial registration numberNCT04417387.

In a phase 3 trial involving more than 15,000 participants, two doses of NVX-CoV2373, a recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nanoparticle vaccine, administered 21 days apart had a vaccine efficacy of 89.7%. Reactogenicity was generally mild and transient, and adverse events were infrequent and of low grade.

The Valneva COVID-19 vaccine (VLA2001; Valneva Austria, Vienna, Austria) is an inactivated whole-virus, adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of primary vaccination with VLA2001 versus the ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca) adenoviral-vectored vaccine. In this immunobridging phase 3 trial (COV-COMPARE), participants aged 18 years and older who were medically stable (as determined by an investigator) were enrolled at 26 sites in the UK. In the double-blind, randomised, controlled arm of the trial, participants aged 30 years and older were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive two doses of VLA2001 (0·5 mL; with 33 antigen units [AU] per dose) or ChAdOx1-S (0·5 mL; with 2·5 × 108 infectious units per dose) on days 1 and 29. In another arm, participants aged 18–29 years received two doses of VLA2001 (same dose) open label on days 1 and 29. The primary immunogenicity outcome was the immune response of a two-dose schedule of VLA2001 on day 43, in adults aged 30 years and older, versus two doses of ChAdOx1-S via superiority of geometric mean titres (GMTs) of neutralising antibodies (GMT ratio of >1 at a two-sided significance level of 5%) and non-inferiority of the seroconversion rate (non-inferiority margin of –10% for the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference between groups). The primary safety outcome was the frequency and severity of any adverse events in all participants up to day 43. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of vaccine. GMTs were assessed in a subset of participants aged 30 years and older who were seronegative at baseline, had at least one evaluable antibody titre measurement after vaccination, and had no confirmed COVID-19 during the study (immunogenicity population); and seroconversion was assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised the immunogenicity population but excluding any participants with major protocol violations. For each timepoint, only participants with available data were included in the analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04864561, and is ongoing. Between April 28 and June 3, 2021, 4181 individuals were screened and 4017 enrolled, of whom 2975 (74%) were aged 30 years or older and randomly assigned to receive VLA2001 (n=1978) or ChAdOx1-S (n=997), and 1042 (26%) were aged 18–29 years (all received open-label VLA2001). 4012 participants received at least one dose of vaccine (1040 in the open-label VLA2001 group, 1977 in the randomised VLA2001 group, and 995 in the ChAdOx1-S group). The immunogenicity population comprised 492 participants in the randomised VLA2001 group and 498 in the ChAdOx1-S group; three participants in the VLA2001 group were excluded from the per-protocol population. VLA2001 induced higher neutralising GMTs than did ChAdOx1-S (803·5 [95% CI 748·5–862·6] vs 576·6 [543·6–611·7]; GMT ratio 1·39 [95% CI 1·25–1·56]; p<0·0001), and non-inferior seroconversion rates (444 [97·4%] of 456 participants vs 444 [98·9%] of 449; difference –1·5% [95% CI –3·3 to 0·2]. Any adverse event was reported in 963 (92·6%) participants in the open-label VLA2001 group, 1755 (88·8%) in the randomised VLA2001 group, and 976 (98·1%) in the ChAdOx1-S group. Most adverse events reported were mild or moderate in severity. VLA2001 has a favourable tolerability profile and met superiority criteria for neutralising antibodies and non-inferiority criterion for seroconversion rates compared with ChAdOx1-S. The data presented here formed the basis of successful marketing approval for use of VLA2001 in primary vaccination in the EU, the UK, Bahrain, and United Arab Emirates. UK Department of Health and Social Care and Valneva Austria.

To investigate the symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection, their dynamics and their discriminatory power for the disease using longitudinally, prospectively collected information reported at the time of their occurrence. We have analysed data from a large phase 3 clinical UK COVID-19 vaccine trial. The alpha variant was the predominant strain. Participants were assessed for SARS-CoV-2 infection via nasal/throat PCR at recruitment, vaccination appointments, and when symptomatic. Statistical techniques were implemented to infer estimates representative of the UK population, accounting for multiple symptomatic episodes associated with one individual. An optimal diagnostic model for SARS-CoV-2 infection was derived. The 4-month prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 2.1%; increasing to 19.4% (16.0%–22.7%) in participants reporting loss of appetite and 31.9% (27.1%–36.8%) in those with anosmia/ageusia. The model identified anosmia and/or ageusia, fever, congestion, and cough to be significantly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Symptoms’ dynamics were vastly different in the two groups; after a slow start peaking later and lasting longer in PCR+ participants, whilst exhibiting a consistent decline in PCR- participants, with, on average, fewer than 3 days of symptoms reported. Anosmia/ageusia peaked late in confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (day 12), indicating a low discrimination power for early disease diagnosis.

Abstract Background Data on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease burden in adults remain scarce. We assessed the burden of confirmed RSV-acute respiratory infections (cRSV-ARIs) in community-dwelling (CD) adults and those in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Methods In this prospective cohort study covering 2 RSV seasons (October 2019–March 2020 and October 2020–June 2021), RSV-ARIs were identified through active surveillance, in medically stable CD-adults ≥50 years (Europe) or adults ≥65 years in LTCFs (Europe and the United States). RSV infection was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction from combined nasal and throat swabs. Results Of 1981 adults enrolled, 1251 adults in CD and 664 LTCFs (season 1) and 1223 adults in CD and 494 LTCFs (season 2) were included in the analyses. During season 1, overall incidence rates ([IRs] cases/1000 person-years) and attack rates (ARs) for cRSV-ARIs were 37.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.62–61.35) and 1.84% in adults in CD and 47.85 (CI, 22.58–101.4) and 2.26% in adults in LTCFs. Complications occurred for 17.4% (CD) and 13.3% (LTCFs) of cRSV-ARIs. One cRSV-ARI occurred in season 2 (IR = 2.91 [CI, 0.40–20.97]; AR = 0.20%), without complications. No cRSV-ARIs led to hospitalization or death. Viral pathogens were codetected in ≤17.4% of cRSV-ARIs. Conclusions RSV is an important cause of disease burden in adults in CD and LTCFs. Despite the observed low severity of cRSV-ARI, our results support the need for RSV prevention strategies among adults ≥50 years old. In a prospective, multi-country, cohort study covering 2 consecutive RSV seasons (Oct2019/Mar2020, Oct2020/Jun2021), the incidence rate of confirmed RSV acute respiratory infections was 37.25 and 47.85 cases/1000 person-years in older adults in community-dwelling and long-term care facilities, respectively. Lay Summary Lay Summary. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes respiratory illnesses, which can lead to serious complications in older adults. We estimated how common infections due to RSV are in adults living in the community or long-term care facilities (LTCFs). For 2 years, we observed approximately 2000 adults 50 years and older in Europe and the United States. Between October 2019 and March 2020, about 2 in 100 adults in this study had RSV infections; of these, fewer than one fifth had complications and there were no hospitalizations or deaths. Other viruses were present for less than one fifth of RSV infections. Between October 2020 and June 2021, during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions, we detected RSV infection in one adult, living in a LTCF, with no complications. RSV causes respiratory disease among adults 50 years and older, and therefore programs to prevent RSV infection are needed in this age group.