Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Series TitleSeries Title
-
Reading LevelReading Level
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersContent TypeItem TypeIs Full-Text AvailableSubjectCountry Of PublicationPublisherSourceTarget AudienceDonorLanguagePlace of PublicationContributorsLocation
Done
Filters
Reset
68,197
result(s) for
"Pandemics - prevention "
Sort by:
How to prevent the next pandemic
\"The COVID-19 pandemic isn't over. But even as governments around the world try to get it under control, they're also starting to talk about what happens next. How can we prevent another pandemic from killing millions of people and devastating the global economy? Can we even hope to accomplish this? Bill Gates believes the answer is yes, and he has written a largely upbeat book that lays out clearly and convincingly what the world should learn from COVID-19, explains the science of fighting pandemics, and suggests what all of us can do to help prevent another one. Given the worldwide success of How to Avoid a Climate Disaster (which debuted at #1 on the New York Times best seller list), Gates is more respected than ever for his approach to solving the world's biggest challenges\"-- Provided by publisher.
A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19
by
Cheng, Matthew P
,
Rajasingham, Radha
,
Boulware, David R
in
Adult
,
Betacoronavirus
,
Binding sites
2020
In this double-blind, randomized trial, 821 asymptomatic persons with a high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to SARS-CoV-2 were assigned to receive hydroxychloroquine or placebo within 4 days after the exposure. No benefit in preventing illness compatible with Covid-19 was found.
Journal Article
Global pandemic threats : a reference handbook
\"Global Pandemic Threats: A Reference Handbook provides all-encompassing coverage that introduces key concepts and traces the history of pandemics, enabling readers to grasp the complexity of the global problem and the difficulties of executing effective solutions. Written in an easy-to-understand manner, it provides a \"go-to\" resource that systematically addresses dozens of diseases of the past as well as re-emergent or newly emerging pathogens that have the potential of becoming pandemics. The book's extensive coverage of past pandemics includes bubonic plague, cholera, influenza, measles, smallpox, tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and yellow fever, and the re-emergence of malaria, measles, pertussis (whooping cough), poliomyelitis, and other contagious diseases. It discusses a broad range of newly emerging viral threats, such as AIDS/HIV, avian flu, anthrax, botulism, Ebola, E. coli, Gulf War syndrome, hanta virus, Lassa virus, Lyme disease, Marburg virus, MERS, MRSA, Ricin, Sin Nombre virus (SNV), and West Nile virus. The work offers perspectives from individuals interested and involved in the fight, including medical professionals and health care workers; profiles of key organizations and persons; a helpful timeline of past and present pandemic outbreaks; and a glossary of key terms and concepts.\" -- Publisher's description
An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 — Preliminary Report
by
Peters, Etza
,
Rouphael, Nadine G
,
Makhene, Mamodikoe
in
2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273
,
Adult
,
Allergies
2020
Two inoculations with a new SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccine that encodes a protein in the coronavirus spike elicited high titers of virus-neutralizing antibody in healthy adult volunteers. Virus-specific T-cell responses were also elicited. Interim findings indicated that a dose of 100 μg per injection maximized immune response and minimized the reactogenicity of the vaccine.
Journal Article
The COVID-19 catastrophe : what's gone wrong and how to stop it happening again
The global response to the Covid-19 pandemic is the greatest science policy failure in a generation. We knew this was coming. Warnings about the threat of a new pandemic have been made repeatedly since the 1980s and it was clear in January that a dangerous new virus was causing a devastating human tragedy in China. And yet the world ignored the warnings. Why? In this short and hard-hitting book, Richard Horton, editor of the medical journal The Lancet, scrutinizes the actions that governments around the world took - and failed to take - as the virus spread from its origins in Wuhan to the global pandemic that it is today. He shows that many Western governments and their scientific advisors made assumptions about the virus and its lethality that turned out to be mistaken. Valuable time was lost while the virus spread unchecked, leaving health systems unprepared for the avalanche of infections that followed. Drawing on his own scientific and medical expertise, Horton outlines the measures that need to be put in place, at both national and international levels, to prevent this kind of catastrophe from happening again. We're supposed to be living in an era where human beings have become the dominant influence on the environment, but Covid-19 has revealed the fragility of our societies and the speed with which our systems can come crashing down. We need to learn the lessons of this pandemic and we need to learn them fast because the next pandemic may arrive sooner than we think.
Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine: a dose-escalation, open-label, non-randomised, first-in-human trial
2020
A vaccine to protect against COVID-19 is urgently needed. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 (Ad5) vectored COVID-19 vaccine expressing the spike glycoprotein of a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) strain.
We did a dose-escalation, single-centre, open-label, non-randomised, phase 1 trial of an Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine in Wuhan, China. Healthy adults aged between 18 and 60 years were sequentially enrolled and allocated to one of three dose groups (5 × 1010, 1 × 1011, and 1·5 × 1011 viral particles) to receive an intramuscular injection of vaccine. The primary outcome was adverse events in the 7 days post-vaccination. Safety was assessed over 28 days post-vaccination. Specific antibodies were measured with ELISA, and the neutralising antibody responses induced by vaccination were detected with SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralisation and pseudovirus neutralisation tests. T-cell responses were assessed by enzyme-linked immunospot and flow-cytometry assays. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04313127.
Between March 16 and March 27, 2020, we screened 195 individuals for eligibility. Of them, 108 participants (51% male, 49% female; mean age 36·3 years) were recruited and received the low dose (n=36), middle dose (n=36), or high dose (n=36) of the vaccine. All enrolled participants were included in the analysis. At least one adverse reaction within the first 7 days after the vaccination was reported in 30 (83%) participants in the low dose group, 30 (83%) participants in the middle dose group, and 27 (75%) participants in the high dose group. The most common injection site adverse reaction was pain, which was reported in 58 (54%) vaccine recipients, and the most commonly reported systematic adverse reactions were fever (50 [46%]), fatigue (47 [44%]), headache (42 [39%]), and muscle pain (18 [17%]. Most adverse reactions that were reported in all dose groups were mild or moderate in severity. No serious adverse event was noted within 28 days post-vaccination. ELISA antibodies and neutralising antibodies increased significantly at day 14, and peaked 28 days post-vaccination. Specific T-cell response peaked at day 14 post-vaccination.
The Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine is tolerable and immunogenic at 28 days post-vaccination. Humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 peaked at day 28 post-vaccination in healthy adults, and rapid specific T-cell responses were noted from day 14 post-vaccination. Our findings suggest that the Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine warrants further investigation.
National Key R&D Program of China, National Science and Technology Major Project, and CanSino Biologics.
Journal Article
Digital contact tracing for pandemic response : ethics and governance guidance
\"Technologies of digital contact tracing have been used in several countries to help in the surveillance and containment of COVID-19. These technologies have promise, but they also raise important ethical, legal, and governance challenges that require comprehensive analysis in order to support decision-making. Johns Hopkins University recognized the importance of helping to guide this process and organized an expert group with members from inside and outside the university. This expert group urges a stepwise approach that prioritizes the alignment of technology with public health needs, building choice into design architecture and capturing real-world results and impacts to allow for adjustments as required\"-- Provided by publisher.
Safety and immunogenicity of an rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine in two formulations: two open, non-randomised phase 1/2 studies from Russia
by
Dzharullaeva, Alina S
,
Erokhova, Alina S
,
Shmarov, Maksim M
in
Adenoviridae
,
Adenoviruses
,
Adult
2020
We developed a heterologous COVID-19 vaccine consisting of two components, a recombinant adenovirus type 26 (rAd26) vector and a recombinant adenovirus type 5 (rAd5) vector, both carrying the gene for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike glycoprotein (rAd26-S and rAd5-S). We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of two formulations (frozen and lyophilised) of this vaccine.
We did two open, non-randomised phase 1/2 studies at two hospitals in Russia. We enrolled healthy adult volunteers (men and women) aged 18–60 years to both studies. In phase 1 of each study, we administered intramuscularly on day 0 either one dose of rAd26-S or one dose of rAd5-S and assessed the safety of the two components for 28 days. In phase 2 of the study, which began no earlier than 5 days after phase 1 vaccination, we administered intramuscularly a prime-boost vaccination, with rAd26-S given on day 0 and rAd5-S on day 21. Primary outcome measures were antigen-specific humoral immunity (SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies measured by ELISA on days 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42) and safety (number of participants with adverse events monitored throughout the study). Secondary outcome measures were antigen-specific cellular immunity (T-cell responses and interferon-γ concentration) and change in neutralising antibodies (detected with a SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assay). These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04436471 and NCT04437875.
Between June 18 and Aug 3, 2020, we enrolled 76 participants to the two studies (38 in each study). In each study, nine volunteers received rAd26-S in phase 1, nine received rAd5-S in phase 1, and 20 received rAd26-S and rAd5-S in phase 2. Both vaccine formulations were safe and well tolerated. The most common adverse events were pain at injection site (44 [58%]), hyperthermia (38 [50%]), headache (32 [42%]), asthenia (21 [28%]), and muscle and joint pain (18 [24%]). Most adverse events were mild and no serious adverse events were detected. All participants produced antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein. At day 42, receptor binding domain-specific IgG titres were 14 703 with the frozen formulation and 11 143 with the lyophilised formulation, and neutralising antibodies were 49·25 with the frozen formulation and 45·95 with the lyophilised formulation, with a seroconversion rate of 100%. Cell-mediated responses were detected in all participants at day 28, with median cell proliferation of 2·5% CD4+ and 1·3% CD8+ with the frozen formulation, and a median cell proliferation of 1·3% CD4+ and 1·1% CD8+ with the lyophilised formulation.
The heterologous rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based COVID-19 vaccine has a good safety profile and induced strong humoral and cellular immune responses in participants. Further investigation is needed of the effectiveness of this vaccine for prevention of COVID-19.
Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.
Journal Article
A pandemic is worldwide
by
Thomson, Sarah L., author
,
Morley, Taia, illustrator
in
Pandemics Juvenile literature.
,
Epidemics Juvenile literature.
,
Epidemics History Juvenile literature.
2022
This introduction to pandemics and their history shows readers how to stay safe, and also includes a glossary, an infographic on how the coronavirus spreads, a handwashing diagram and a timeline showing the pandemics of the past.
Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: a preliminary report of a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial
by
Sanchez Riera, Lidia
,
Larkworthy, Colin W.
,
Owen, Cathy
in
Acetaminophen - therapeutic use
,
Adenoviruses
,
Adenoviruses, Simian - genetics
2020
The pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) might be curtailed by vaccination. We assessed the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of a viral vectored coronavirus vaccine that expresses the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.
We did a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial in five trial sites in the UK of a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein compared with a meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) as control. Healthy adults aged 18–55 years with no history of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or of COVID-19-like symptoms were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 at a dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles or MenACWY as a single intramuscular injection. A protocol amendment in two of the five sites allowed prophylactic paracetamol to be administered before vaccination. Ten participants assigned to a non-randomised, unblinded ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost group received a two-dose schedule, with the booster vaccine administered 28 days after the first dose. Humoral responses at baseline and following vaccination were assessed using a standardised total IgG ELISA against trimeric SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, a muliplexed immunoassay, three live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assays (a 50% plaque reduction neutralisation assay [PRNT50]; a microneutralisation assay [MNA50, MNA80, and MNA90]; and Marburg VN), and a pseudovirus neutralisation assay. Cellular responses were assessed using an ex-vivo interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay. The co-primary outcomes are to assess efficacy, as measured by cases of symptomatic virologically confirmed COVID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events. Analyses were done by group allocation in participants who received the vaccine. Safety was assessed over 28 days after vaccination. Here, we report the preliminary findings on safety, reactogenicity, and cellular and humoral immune responses. The study is ongoing, and was registered at ISRCTN, 15281137, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606.
Between April 23 and May 21, 2020, 1077 participants were enrolled and assigned to receive either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (n=543) or MenACWY (n=534), ten of whom were enrolled in the non-randomised ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost group. Local and systemic reactions were more common in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and many were reduced by use of prophylactic paracetamol, including pain, feeling feverish, chills, muscle ache, headache, and malaise (all p<0·05). There were no serious adverse events related to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. In the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, spike-specific T-cell responses peaked on day 14 (median 856 spot-forming cells per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells, IQR 493–1802; n=43). Anti-spike IgG responses rose by day 28 (median 157 ELISA units [EU], 96–317; n=127), and were boosted following a second dose (639 EU, 360–792; n=10). Neutralising antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 32 (91%) of 35 participants after a single dose when measured in MNA80 and in 35 (100%) participants when measured in PRNT50. After a booster dose, all participants had neutralising activity (nine of nine in MNA80 at day 42 and ten of ten in Marburg VN on day 56). Neutralising antibody responses correlated strongly with antibody levels measured by ELISA (R2=0·67 by Marburg VN; p<0·001).
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed an acceptable safety profile, and homologous boosting increased antibody responses. These results, together with the induction of both humoral and cellular immune responses, support large-scale evaluation of this candidate vaccine in an ongoing phase 3 programme.
UK Research and Innovation, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and the German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner site Gießen-Marburg-Langen.
Journal Article