Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Effective antibiotic prescribing is a core competency for physicians and pharmacists in combating antimicrobial resistance. Despite this, many healthcare professionals report limited confidence in applying antibiotic stewardship principles in clinical practice. This study evaluates the impact of a structured, interdisciplinary online course designed to improve knowledge and self-efficacy in rational antibiotic use. Methods We developed and implemented a problem-based, eight-module online course delivered across four hospitals in 2023 and 2024. The course targeted physicians and pharmacists and focused on practical aspects of antimicrobial prescribing. In a quasi-experimental pre-post design, participants completed self-assessments regarding their confidence and knowledge in antibiotic stewardship using a validated 25-item questionnaire. Results Across both years, an average of 95 participants per session completed the course. Post-course evaluations showed a consistent increase in self-reported confidence levels in managing antibiotic therapy. On a seven-stepped scale (1 = very well prepared; 7 = not prepared at all), confidence increased from 3.53 (95% CI 3.3–3.8) to 2.16 (95% CI 2.0–2.3). Participants highlighted the relevance of interprofessional exchange and case-based discussions as key benefits. Conclusion Structured online education with interdisciplinary participation and active learning strategies can enhance healthcare professionals’ confidence and competence in antibiotic stewardship. Regular evaluation of both content delivery and learner outcomes is essential to optimize such training formats and support responsible antimicrobial prescribing in clinical settings.

We are in the midst of a pandemic caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 has caused more than two million deaths after one year of the pandemic. The world is experiencing a deep economic recession. Safe and effective vaccines are needed to prevent further morbidity and mortality. Vaccine candidates against COVID-19 have been developed at an unprecedented speed, with more than 200 vaccine candidates currently under investigation. Among those, 20 candidates have entered the clinical Phase 3 to evaluate efficacy, and three have been approved by the European Medicines Agency. The aim of immunization is to act against infection, disease and/or transmission. However, the measurement of vaccine efficacy is challenging, as efficacy trials need to include large cohorts with verum and placebo cohorts. In the future, this will be even more challenging as further vaccine candidates will receive approval, an increasing number of humans will receive vaccinations and incidence might decrease. To evaluate novel and second-generation vaccine candidates, randomized placebo-controlled trials might not be appropriate anymore. Correlates of protection (CoP) could be an important tool to evaluate novel vaccine candidates, but vaccine-induced CoP have not been clearly defined for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In this review, we report on immunogenicity against natural SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine-induced immune responses and discuss immunological markers that can be linked to protection. By discussing the immunogenicity and efficacy of forerunner vaccines, we aim to give a comprehensive overview of possible efficacy measures and CoP.

Vaccine development is essential for pandemic preparedness. We previously conducted a Phase 1 clinical trial of the vector vaccine candidate MVA-MERS-S against the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), expressing its full spike glycoprotein (MERS-CoV-S), as a homologous two-dose regimen (Days 0 and 28). Here, we evaluate the safety (primary objective) and immunogenicity (secondary and exploratory objectives: magnitude and characterization of vaccine-induced humoral responses) of a third vaccination with MVA-MERS-S in a subgroup of trial participants one year after primary immunization. MVA-MERS-S booster vaccination is safe and well-tolerated. Both binding and neutralizing anti-MERS-CoV antibody titers increase substantially in all participants and exceed maximum titers observed after primary immunization more than 10-fold. We identify four immunogenic IgG epitopes, located in the receptor-binding domain (RBD, n  = 1) and the S2 subunit ( n  = 3) of MERS-CoV-S. The level of baseline anti-human coronavirus antibody titers does not impact the generation of anti-MERS-CoV antibody responses. Our data support the rationale of a booster vaccination with MVA-MERS-S and encourage further investigation in larger trials. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03615911. In a clinical trial, Fathi et al. show that a booster vaccination with a vector vaccine candidate against the highly pathogenic Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus is safe and strongly improves the immunity generated by primary immunization.

The last seven years have seen the greatest surge of Ebola virus disease (EVD) cases in equatorial Africa, including the 2013–2016 epidemic in West Africa and the recent epidemics in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The vaccine clinical trials that took place in West Africa and the DRC, as well as follow-up studies in collaboration with EVD survivor communities, have for the first time allowed researchers to compare immune memory induced by natural infection and vaccination. These comparisons may be relevant to evaluate the putative effectiveness of vaccines and candidate medical countermeasures such as convalescent plasma transfer. In this study, we compared the long-term functionality of anti-EBOV glycoprotein (GP) antibodies from EVD survivors with that from volunteers who received the recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus vectored vaccine (rVSV-ZEBOV) during the Phase I clinical trial in Hamburg. Our study highlights important differences between EBOV vaccination and natural infection and provides a framework for comparison with other vaccine candidates.

IntroductionLassa fever (LF) is a severe and often fatal systemic disease in humans and affects a large number of countries in West Africa. Treatment options are limited to supportive care and the broad-spectrum antiviral agent ribavirin. However, evidence for ribavirin efficacy in patients with LF is poor and pharmacokinetic (PK) data are not available.Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital (ISTH) developed an intravenous ribavirin regimen different to the WHO recommendation. Apart from a lower total daily dose the drug is usually administered once per day which reduces the exposure of personnel to patients with LF. The aim of this study is to characterise the PK of the Irrua ribavirin regimen.Methods and analysisThis prospective, observational clinical study will assess PK properties of the Irrua ribavirin regimen on routinely ribavirin-treated patients with LF at ISTH, a referral hospital serving 19 local governmental areas in a LF endemic zone in Nigeria. Participants will be adults with PCR-confirmed LF. The primary objective is to describe classical PK parameters for ribavirin (maximum plasma drug concentration, time to maximum plasma drug concentration, area under the plasma drug concentration vs time curve, half-life time T1/2, volume of distribution). Blood samples will be collected at 0.5, 1, 3, 5, 8, 12 and 24 hours after doses on day 1, day 4 and day 10 of ribavirin treatment. Ribavirin plasma concentrations will be determined using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be conducted in compliance with the protocol, the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and the Nigerian National Code for Health Research Ethics. The protocol has received approval by the Health Research Ethics Committee of ISTH. Results will be made available to LF survivors, their caregivers, the funders, LF research society and other researchers.Registration detailsISRCTN11104750

With great interest, we studied the recently updated guideline on the management of endocarditis by the European Society of Cardiology that was published in the European Heart Journal,1 appreciating the substantial new insights and additions in the management of this challenging disease. Regarding antibiotic treatment, the authors recommend ampicillin and ceftriaxon as empirical antibiotic treatment for native valve endocarditis (NVE; recommendation table 10).1 Given the fact that the most common pathogen isolated in NVE is still methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), the empirical treatment recommendations are problematic: ampicillin is not effective in most MSSA-isolates and the use and non-inferiority of ceftriaxone for MSSA-endocarditis is not sufficiently supported by current data.4 In clinical practice, we see many patients with culture-negative endocarditis due to previous antibiotic treatment or insufficient blood culture diagnostics before starting empirical treatment. [...]we believe that the need of transoesophageal echocardiography for all patients considered for oral treatment in the trial does not warrant direct transfer from the POET-protocol into real-life clinical guidelines.

The current COVID-19 pandemic is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). A better understanding of its immunogenicity can be important for the development of improved diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Here, we report the longitudinal analysis of three COVID-19 patients with moderate (#1) and mild disease (#2 and #3). Antibody serum responses were analyzed using spike glycoprotein enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), full-proteome peptide, and glycan microarrays. ELISA immunoglobulin A, G, and M (IgA, IgG, and IgM) signals increased over time for individuals #1 and #2, whereas #3 only showed no clear positive IgG and IgM result. In contrast, peptide microarrays showed increasing IgA/G signal intensity and epitope spread only in the moderate patient #1 over time, whereas early but transient IgA and stable IgG responses were observed in the two mild cases #2 and #3. Glycan arrays showed an interaction of antibodies to fragments of high-mannose and core N-glycans, present on the viral shield. In contrast to protein ELISA, microarrays allow for a deeper understanding of IgA, IgG, and IgM antibody responses to specific epitopes of the whole proteome and glycans of SARS-CoV-2 in parallel. In the future, this may help to better understand and to monitor vaccination programs and monoclonal antibodies as therapeutics.

Emerging or re-emerging viral diseases have a pandemic potential and threaten global health. Vaccination is of crucial importance in the prevention of emerging and re-emerging viral diseases. Description of the current status of vaccine development against Filoviridae, highly pathogenic coronaviruses, smallpox viruses, influenza viruses and arboviruses. Focused literature search. The World Health Organization (WHO) regularly publishes a list of infectious diseases that are expected to pose a major threat to humanity as they are could potentially trigger new pandemics; however, in addition to these human-to-human transmissible diseases, some arboviruses also have pandemic potential. In recent years numerous new vaccines, some of which are highly effective, have been licensed against new and re-emerging viral diseases and other promising vaccine candidates are currently in development. There are still gaps in the development of vaccines in the area of Filoviridae and highly pathogenic coronaviruses. Vaccinations against smallpox viruses have been available for a long time. Developing influenza vaccines against novel strains in a timely manner is a challenge and universal influenza vaccines could be a possible solution. Modern vaccines are available against the arboviruses dengue and Chikungunya fever.

The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) causes a respiratory disease with a case fatality rate of up to 35%. Given its potential to cause a public health emergency and the absence of efficacious drugs or vaccines, MERS is one of the WHO priority diseases warranting urgent research and development of countermeasures. We aimed to assess safety and tolerability of an anti-MERS-CoV modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)-based vaccine candidate that expresses the MERS-CoV spike glycoprotein, MVA-MERS-S, in healthy adults. This open-label, phase 1 trial was done at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (Hamburg, Germany). Participants were healthy men and women aged 18–55 years with no clinically significant health problems as determined during medical history and physical examination, a body-mass index of 18·5–30·0 kg/m2 and weight of more than 50 kg at screening, and a negative pregnancy test for women. A key exclusion criterion was a previous MVA vaccination. For the prime immunisation, participants received doses of 1 × 107 plaque-forming unit (PFU; low-dose group) or 1 × 108 PFU (high-dose group) MVA-MERS-S intramuscularly. A second identical dose was administered intramuscularly as a booster immunisation 28 days after first injection. As a control group for immunogenicity analyses, blood samples were drawn at identical study timepoints from six healthy adults, who did not receive any injections. The primary objectives of the study were safety and tolerability of the two dosage levels and reactogenicity after administration. Immunogenicity was assessed as a secondary endpoint by ELISA and neutralisation tests. T-cell immunity was evaluated by interferon-γ-linked enzyme-linked immune absorbent spot assay. All participants who were vaccinated at least once were included in the safety analysis. Immunogenicity was analysed in the participants who completed 6 months of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03615911, and EudraCT, 2014-003195-23 From Dec 17, 2017, to June 5, 2018, 26 participants (14 in the low-dose group and 12 in the high-dose group) were enrolled and received the first dose of the vaccine according to their group allocation. Of these, 23 participants (12 in the low-dose group and 11 in the high-dose group) received a second dose of MVA-MERS-S according to their group allocation after a 28-day interval and completed follow-up. Homologous prime–boost immunisation with MVA-MERS-S revealed a benign safety profile with only transient mild-to-moderate reactogenicity. Participants had no severe or serious adverse events. 67 vaccine-related adverse events were reported in ten (71%) of 14 participants in the low-dose group, and 111 were reported in ten (83%) of 12 participants in the high-dose group. Solicited local reactions were the most common adverse events: pain was observed in 17 (65%; seven in the low-dose group vs ten in the high-dose group) participants, swelling in ten (38%; two vs eight) participants, and induration in ten (38%; one vs nine) participants. Headaches (observed in seven participants in the low-dose group vs nine in the high-dose group) and fatigue or malaise (ten vs seven participants) were the most common solicited systemic adverse events. All adverse events resolved swiftly (within 1–3 days) and without sequelae. Following booster immunisation, nine (75%) of 12 participants in the low-dose group and 11 (100%) participants in the high-dose group showed seroconversion using a MERS-CoV S1 ELISA at any timepoint during the study. Binding antibody titres correlated with MERS-CoV-specific neutralising antibodies (Spearman's correlation r=0·86 [95% CI 0·6960–0·9427], p=0·0001). MERS-CoV spike-specific T-cell responses were detected in ten (83%) of 12 immunised participants in the low-dose group and ten (91%) of 11 immunised participants in the high-dose group. Vaccination with MVA-MERS-S had a favourable safety profile without serious or severe adverse events. Homologous prime–boost immunisation induced humoral and cell-mediated responses against MERS-CoV. A dose–effect relationship was demonstrated for reactogenicity, but not for vaccine-induced immune responses. The data presented here support further clinical testing of MVA-MERS-S in larger cohorts to advance MERS vaccine development. German Center for Infection Research.

Purpose Bacterial pneumonia, a major cause of respiratory tract infections (RTI), can be challenging to diagnose and to treat adequately, especially when seasonal viral pathogens co-circulate. The aim of this study was to give a real-world snapshot of the burden of respiratory disease and treatment choices in the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary care hospital in Germany in the fall of 2022. Methods Anonymized analysis of a quality control initiative that prospectively documented all patients presenting to our ED with symptoms suggestive of RTI from Nov 7th to Dec 18th, 2022. Results 243 patients were followed at the time of their ED attendance. Clinical, laboratory and radiographic examination was performed in 92% of patients (224/243). Microbiological work-up to identify causative pathogens including blood cultures, sputum or urine-antigen tests were performed in 55% of patients ( n  = 134). Detection of viral pathogens increased during the study period from 7 to 31 cases per week, while bacterial pneumonias, respiratory tract infections without detection of a viral pathogen and non-infectious etiologies remained stable. A high burden of bacterial and viral co-infections became apparent (16%, 38/243), and co-administration of antibiotic and antiviral treatments was observed (14%, n  = 35/243). 17% of patients (41/243) received antibiotic coverage without a diagnosis of a bacterial etiology. Conclusion During the fall of 2022, the burden of RTI caused by detectable viral pathogens increased unusually early. Rapid and unexpected changes in pathogen distribution highlight the need for targeted diagnostics to improve the quality of RTI management in the ED.