Search This Blog

Friday, January 21, 2022

U.S. opposes plans to strengthen World Health Organization

 The US, the World Well being Group’s prime donor, is resisting proposals to make the company extra unbiased, 4 officers concerned within the talks stated, elevating doubts in regards to the Biden administration’s long-term help for the U.N. company.

The proposal, made by the WHO’s working group on sustainable financing, would enhance every member state’s standing annual contribution, in keeping with a WHO doc printed on-line and dated Jan. 4.

The plan is a part of a wider reform course of galvanised by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has highlighted the restrictions of the WHO’s energy to intervene early in a disaster.

However the U.S. authorities is opposing the reform as a result of it has considerations in regards to the WHO’s capacity to confront future threats, together with from China, U.S. officers advised Reuters.

It’s pushing as a substitute for the creation of a separate fund, instantly managed by donors, that will finance prevention and management of well being emergencies.

4 European officers concerned within the talks, who declined to be named as a result of they weren’t authorised to talk to the media, confirmed the U.S. opposition. The U.S. authorities had no fast remark.

The printed proposal requires member states’ necessary contributions to rise step by step from 2024 so they might account for half the company’s $2 billion core funds by 2028, in comparison with lower than 20% now, the doc stated.

The WHO’s core funds is geared toward preventing pandemics and strengthening healthcare programs the world over. It additionally raises an extra $1 billion or so a 12 months to deal with particular world challenges resembling tropical illnesses and influenza.

Supporters say that the present reliance on voluntary funding from member states and from charities such because the Invoice and Melinda Gates Basis forces the WHO to deal with priorities set by the funders, and makes it much less in a position to criticise members when issues go mistaken.

An unbiased panel on pandemics that was appointed to advise on the WHO reform had known as for a a lot greater enhance in necessary charges, to 75% of the core funds, deeming the present system “a serious threat to the integrity and independence” of the WHO.

LONG-STANDING SCEPTICISM

The WHO itself responded to a question by saying that “solely versatile and predictable funds can allow WHO to totally implement the priorities of the Member States”.

Prime European Union donors, together with Germany, again the plan, together with most African, South Asian, South American and Arab international locations, three of the European officers stated.

The proposal is to be mentioned on the WHO’s govt board assembly subsequent week however the divisions imply no settlement is predicted, three of the officers stated.

The WHO confirmed there was at the moment no consensus amongst member states, and stated talks have been prone to proceed till the annual assembly in Could of the World Well being Meeting, the company’s prime decision-making physique.

European donors particularly favour empowering, quite than weakening, multilateral organisations together with the WHO.

One European official stated the U.S. plan “causes scepticism amongst many international locations”, and stated the creation of a brand new construction managed by donors, quite than by the WHO, would weaken the company’s capacity to fight future pandemics.

Washington has been vital of the WHO for a while.

Former president Donald Trump pulled the US out of the WHO after accusing it of defending China’s preliminary delays in sharing data when COVID-19 emerged there in 2019.

The Biden administration rejoined quickly after taking workplace, however officers advised Reuters they assume the WHO wants vital reform, and raised considerations about its governance, construction and skill to confront rising threats, not least from China.

One of many European officers stated different huge international locations, together with Japan and Brazil, have been additionally hesitant in regards to the printed WHO proposal.

Two of the European officers stated China had not but made its place clear, whereas a 3rd official listed Beijing among the many critics of the proposal.

https://odishaexpo.com/exclusive-u-s-opposes-plans-to-strengthen-world-health-organization/

U.S. studies highlight the need for COVID boosters to fight Omicron

 

Three U.S. studies show that a third dose of an mRNA vaccine is key to fighting the Omicron coronavirus variant, providing 90% protection against hospitalization due to COVID-19, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said on Friday.

The studies, led by the CDC, are among the first in the United States to look at the impact of booster doses against the fast-spreading Omicron variant, which now accounts for 99% of all new COVID cases.

Overall, they suggest that boosters helped protect against both infection and symptomatic disease. Adults aged 50 and older saw the most benefit from an extra dose of the vaccines made by BioNTech SE with Pfizer Inc or Moderna Inc.

"Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said in a White House briefing on Friday.

As has been shown in other countries, vaccine boosters performed better against the Delta variant than Omicron, a highly mutated version of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that has been able to evade immunity from vaccines and prior infections.

One of the studies, published on Friday https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e3.htm?s_cid=mm7104e3_w in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, looked at rates of hospitalization, emergency department and urgent care visits in 10 states between Aug. 26, 2021, and Jan. 5, 2022.

It found that protection from two doses of vaccine fell to 57% in people who got their second shot at least six months earlier. Among those who received a booster, protection from hospitalization and urgent care visits was 90%.

In another study https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788485#:~:text=Conclusions%20and%20Relevance%20Among%20individuals,compared%20with%20test-negative%20controls published in the JAMA medical journal, researchers reviewed data on 23,391 COVID-19 cases caused by either the Delta or Omicron variant among people seeking testing between Dec. 10, 2021, and Jan. 1, 2022.

They found that among people seeking testing for COVID-like symptoms, those who had received three doses of an mRNA vaccine had the highest protection from infection compared with those who got two doses or were unvaccinated.

Because of the timing of U.S. booster recommendations, most people in the study had been vaccinated within a month of seeking testing, which likely contributed to the benefit.

Data from the UK has shown that the increased antibody protection gained from boosters wanes after 10 months, so it is unclear how long that benefit would hold.

Some countries have already started offering additional booster doses, but a recent study https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-study-shows-4th-shot-covid-19-vaccine-not-able-block-omicron-2022-01-17 from Israel showed that while a fourth dose of an mRNA vaccine boosted antibodies, the level was not high enough to prevent infection by the Omicron variant.

Early enthusiasm for boosters in the United States has been lackluster, fueled in part by rapidly shifting public health messaging and concerns among some experts over a lack of U.S. data demonstrating their benefit.

There is also the misguided perception among some Americans that if you can still get infected, why bother with a booster?

According to the CDC, only 82.5 million, or 39.3%, of fully vaccinated Americans have received a COVID-19 booster dose.

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/latest/U-S-studies-highlight-the-need-for-COVID-boosters-to-fight-Omicron--37611604/

US starts shipping free COVID tests amid Omicron -White House

 

The U.S. Postal Service has begun shipping free at-home rapid COVID-19 tests after millions of orders were placed through a new federal website launched this week, the White House said on Friday as the rise in Omicron-related cases shifted nationwide.

The federal government has tens of millions of tests on hand and started sending them on Thursday, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Jeffrey Zients told reporters at a briefing, adding the administration would release more data next week.

The push to get tests in the hands of Americans at no cost, along with free best-protective masks, comes as the surge in cases driven by the highly transmissible Omicron variant began to subside in some states.

The average daily U.S. COVID-19 cases from the Omicron variant fell about 5% in the past week, particularly in areas that saw an early surge such as New York, Rhode Island and Connecticut, the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said. There were about 744,600 cases per day on average in the past seven days.

"In some parts of the country we are seeing the number of daily cases caused by the Omicron variant beginning to decline," CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said at the briefing. "The surge in cases started at different times in different regions and (we) may continue to see high case counts in some areas of the country in the days and weeks ahead."

Daily COVID-19 hospitalizations were down about 1% at 21,000 on average in the past seven days, she said, with daily deaths at more than 1,700 per day.

Walensky also said the agency was looking to shift its language on COVID-19 vaccinations to encourage Americans to be "up-to-date" by having a timely booster dose, but did not say whether it was formally changing its definition of fully vaccinated.

"Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible," she said.

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/latest/US-starts-shipping-free-COVID-tests-amid-Omicron-White-House--37611631/

Fed judge in Texas blocks Biden's vaccine mandate for federal workers

 A federal judge in Texas on Friday blocked President Biden's mandate for federal workers to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in the latest blow to the White House's vaccination efforts.

Judge Jeffrey Brown, who was appointed by former President Trump, wrote that the order exceeded the president's authority.

The case is about "whether the President can, with the stroke of a pen and without the input of Congress, require millions of federal employees to undergo a medical procedure as a condition of their employment," Brown wrote.

The Department of Justice immediately said it would appeal.

The order comes after the Supreme Court earlier this month blocked Biden's mandate that employees at businesses with 100 or more workers get vaccinated or regularly tested, while upholding the vaccination mandate for health care workers.

The federal government's power to mandate vaccination for its own employees is thought to be on stronger legal footing, though Friday's ruling underscores the ongoing nature of the dispute.

"I’m sorry, but this is just insane," Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, wrote on Twitter. "The federal government lacks the power to require its *own* employees to be vaccinated?"

Judge Brown pointed to the interest in "maintaining the liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions according to their own convictions."

Republicans have mounted a major legal campaign against Biden's vaccine mandates and have denounced them for infringing on people's personal choices. 

Many health experts have praised the mandates as a step towards getting more people vaccinated, a crucial step in protecting against severe illness from COVID-19.

After the mandate for large employers was struck down earlier this month, Biden urged businesses to impose mandates for their workers on their own. 

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/590797-federal-judge-in-texas-blocks-bidens-vaccine-mandate-for-federal-workers

Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ITCI) Sees Significant Growth in Short Interest

 Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ITCI) saw a large increase in short interest in December. As of December 31st, there was short interest totalling 4,530,000 shares, an increase of 22.8% from the December 15th total of 3,690,000 shares. Currently, 6.2% of the company's stock are short sold. Based on an average trading volume of 916,200 shares, the days-to-cover ratio is currently 4.9 days.

https://www.marketbeat.com/instant-alerts/nasdaq-itci-options-data-report-2022-01-2/

Rituximab and COVID Shots: Studies Begin to Answer Key Questions

 Rituximab has presented something of a conundrum for patients taking the monoclonal antibody during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Used to manage a variety of autoimmune diseases and cancers, rituximab acts against CD20 proteins expressed on the surface of B cells, causing B-cell depletion. However, it is this B-cell depletion that may put these patients at greater risk of COVID-19 development, progression to more severe disease, and in-hospital mortality. Evidence for this appears to be mixed, with studies showing both that patients using rituximab to manage various diseases are and are not at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 progression, and mortality.

As COVID-19 vaccine rollouts take place across the world, more questions have been raised about the relationship between B-cell depletion from anti-CD20 therapies and COVID-19 vaccines. Do rituximab and other anti-CD20 therapies affect a patient's response to COVID-19 vaccines? If this is the case, does the timing of anti-CD20 treatment matter to maximize B-cell levels and improve the vaccine's effectiveness? And how do COVID-19 vaccine booster doses factor into the equation?

This article aims to summarize the latest research on how rituximab affects humoral and cell-mediated response following a COVID-19 vaccine primary series, and whether the addition of a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose changes patient response.

Humoral and Cell-Mediated Responses Following COVID-19 Vaccination

First, the bad news: The vaccine is unquestionably safe to administer in patients taking rituximab, but one thing that has been well established is that antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in these individuals does is reduced. This isn't entirely unprecedented, as previous studies have shown a weakened immune response to pneumococcal polysaccharide and keyhole limpet hemocyanin vaccines among patients taking rituximab.

Dr Robert Spiera

"Compromised immunogenicity to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines has been demonstrated in rituximab-treated patients, which is of particular concern given the observation that B-cell–depleting therapies may be associated with worse COVID outcomes," Robert F. Spiera, MD, director of the Scleroderma, Vasculitis, and Myositis Center at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York, said in an interview.

For example, in a recent study from the Medical University of Vienna, 29 (39%) of 74 patients receiving rituximab (43% as monotherapy, 57% with conventional-synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs) who were vaccinated with either the Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) or Spikevax (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine achieved seroconversion, compared with 100% of patients in a healthy control group, and all but 1 patient without detectable CD19+ peripheral B cells did not develop anti–SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain antibodies.

"There is an increasing number of studies in this field, and they confirm that patients treated with rituximab and other anti-CD20 agents have severely reduced serological responses to COVID-19 vaccines," Ingrid Jyssum, MD, of the division of rheumatology and research at Diakonhjemmet Hospital in Oslo, said in an interview.

One silver lining is that patients treated with anti-CD20 therapies appear to have a cell-mediated response following vaccination even if they don't develop SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. "Studies that also investigate T-cell responses are starting to emerge, and so far, they show that, even if the patients do not have antibodies, they may have T-cell responses," Jyssum said.

One study of 24 patients with autoimmune diseases taking rituximab that evaluated humoral and T-cell responses following vaccination with the Comirnaty vaccine found that none had a humoral response to the vaccine, but the T-cell response from that group did not significantly differ from 35 patients receiving other immunosuppressants and 26 patients in a healthy control group. In another study of rituximab- or ocrelizumab-treated patients who received mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, 69.4% developed SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies, compared with a control group, but 96.2% of patients taking ocrelizumab and 81.8% of patients taking rituximab mounted a spike-specific CD8+ T-cell response, compared with 66.7% in the control group, and there were comparable rates (85%-90%) of spike-specific CD4+ T cells in all groups. In the study from the Medical University of Vienna, T-cell response was detected in rituximab-treated patients who both did and did not mount an antibody response.

The clinical relevance of how a blunted humoral immune response but a respectable T-cell response to COVID-19 vaccines affects patients treated with anti-CD20 therapies isn't currently known, Jyssum said.

While these data are reassuring, they're also incomplete, Spiera noted. "The ultimate outcome of relevance to assess vaccine efficacy is protection from COVID and from severe outcomes of COVID infection (i.e., hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, death). That data will require assessment of very large numbers of rituximab-treated vaccinated patients to be compared with rituximab-treated unvaccinated patients, and is unlikely to be forthcoming in the very near future.

"In the meantime, however, achieving serologic positivity, meaning having evidence of serologic as well as cellular immunity following vaccination, is a desired outcome, and likely implies more robust immunity."

Does Treatment Timing Impact COVID-19 Vaccine Response?

Given enough time, B-cell reconstitution will occur in patients taking rituximab. With that in mind, is it beneficial to wait a certain amount of time after a patient has stopped rituximab therapy or time since their last dose before giving them a COVID-19 vaccine? In their guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, the American College of Rheumatology said there is moderate evidence to consider "optimal timing of dosing and vaccination with the rheumatology provider before proceeding."

"Guidelines and preliminary studies of serologic response to COVID vaccine in rituximab-treated patients have suggested that longer time from last rituximab exposure is associated with a greater likelihood of a serologic response," Spiera said.

In a brief report published in Arthritis & Rheumatology, Spiera and colleagues performed a retrospective chart review of 56 patients with varying levels of last exposure to rituximab who received a COVID-19 vaccine. Their results showed that, when patients were vaccinated 6-12 months after the last rituximab dose, 55% were seronegative, and when this was more than 12 months, only 13% were seronegative, compared with seronegativity in 86% who were vaccinated less than 6 months after their last rituximab dose.

The RituxiVac trial, conducted by researchers in Switzerland, also examined vaccine responses of 96 rituximab-treated patients who received Comirnaty or Spikevax; results recently published in The Lancet Rheumatology showed findings similar to other studies, with reduced humoral and cell-mediated responses. In the RituxiVac trial, the median time to last anti-CD20 treatment was 1.07 years.

"The typical interval between rituximab doses [for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, as well as for remission maintenance in antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody–associated vasculitis] is typically 6 months, and this has become widely used as the interval from last rituximab to time of COVID vaccination, with a recommendation to wait 4 weeks (if possible) from time of vaccination until the next rituximab administration," Spiera explained. However, this window seems to vary depending on the study.

Recent research published in Arthritis & Rheumatology indicates B-cell levels could be a relevant indicator for humoral and cell-mediated response in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with rituximab, with a level of 10 B cells/mcL (0.4% of lymphocytes) identified as one potential marker for likely seroconversion following COVID-19 vaccination.

"In some smaller case series, it has been further recognized that rituximab-treated patients who were beginning to reconstitute peripheral B cells were most likely to respond serologically. Our present study confirmed those findings, demonstrating that the presence of detectable B cells was strongly associated with vaccine responsiveness, and affords complementary information to time from last [rituximab dose] in informing the likelihood of a vaccine response," Spiera said.

However, the literature is limited in this area, and an exact cutoff for B-cell counts in these patients isn't currently known, Jyssum said. A better metric is time away from anti-CD20 therapies, with CD19 cell count being highly correlated with last infusion.

Spiera agreed that there is no consistent B-cell percentage that works as a cutoff. "In our study, we looked at it as a binary variable, although we did find that a higher percentage of B cells in the peripheral lymphocyte population was associated with a higher likelihood of seroconversion. We did not, however, identify a 'threshold' for vaccine serologic responsiveness."

Should Clinicians Measure Antibodies?

The Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended that health care providers and the public not use COVID-19 antibody tests as a way to gauge immunity after exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. The ACR's guidance on COVID-19 vaccination for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases strongly recommends against ordering antibody tests for patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases as a way to measure immunity.

"Generally, such measurements are not recommended as the clinical correlate of various antibody levels are not known," Jyssum said. "With regular infusions of rituximab or other anti-CD20 agents, one cannot expect that these patients will develop significant levels of antibodies."

However, she said there might be situations where it's useful to know whether a patient has developed antibodies at all. "Assessing the significance of specific antibody levels is difficult, and the subject of scientific studies. Patients lacking a humoral vaccine response are left to rely on their T-cell responses and on infectious control measures to prevent disease."

Spiera said he disagreed with guidelines recommending against checking antibody levels after vaccination, "particularly in patients treated with immunosuppressive medications that might be expected to blunt their serologic response to the vaccines.

"Although we cannot be sure what level of measurable antibodies offer what level of protection, most clinicians would agree that patients who demonstrate no detectable antibodies (which is a common finding in rituximab-treated patients) should be considered at higher risk," he said. "Indeed, recommendations regarding booster vaccine administration in general was initially based on the observation of declining antibody levels with longer time from vaccination."

Do COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters Help Patients on Anti-CD20 Therapy?

As of January 2022, the FDA and CDC have recommended a third primary series shot of COVID-19 vaccines for some moderately to severely immunocompromised patients as young as 5 years old (for Comirnaty vaccine) or a booster shot of either Comirnaty or Spikevax for everyone aged 12 years and older, including immunocompromised people, while the ACR goes into more detail and recommends clinicians time a patient's booster shot with temporary treatment interruption.

In The Lancet Rheumatology, Jyssum and colleagues recently published results from the prospective Nor-vaC study examining the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses of 87 patients with RA being treated with rituximab who received the Comirnaty, Spikevax, or Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca) COVID-19 vaccines; of these, 49 patients received a booster dose at a median of 70 days after completing their primary series. The results showed 19 patients (28.1%) had a serologic response after their primary series, while 8 of 49 patients (16.3%) who received their booster dose had a serologic response.

All patients who received a third dose in the study had a T-cell response, Jyssum said. "This is reassuring for patients and clinicians. T cells have been found to be important in countering COVID-19 disease, but whether we can rely on the T-cell response alone in the absence of antibodies to protect patients from infection or from serious COVID disease is still not determined," she said.

When asked if she would recommend COVID-19 vaccine booster doses for patients on rituximab, Jyssum replied: "Absolutely."

Another study, recently published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, examined heterologous and homologous booster doses for 60 patients receiving rituximab without seroconversion after their COVID-19 vaccine primary series. The results showed no significant difference in new seroconversion at 4 weeks based on whether the patient received a vector or mRNA vaccine (22% vs. 32%), but all patients who received a booster dose with a vector vaccine had specific T-cell responses, compared with 81% of patients who received an mRNA vaccine booster. There was a new humoral and/or cellular response in 9 of 11 patients (82%), and most patients with peripheral B cells (12 of 18 patients; 67%) achieved seroconversion.

"Our data show that a cellular and/or humoral immune response can be achieved on a third COVID-19 vaccination in most of the patients who initially developed neither a humoral nor a cellular immune response," the researchers concluded. "The efficacy data together with the safety data seen in our trial provide a favorable risk/benefit ratio and support the implementation of a third vaccination for nonseroconverted high-risk autoimmune disease patients treated with B-cell–depleting agents."

Spiera said booster doses are an important part of the equation, and "it is important to consider factors that would be associated with a greater likelihood of achieving a serologic response, particularly in those patients who did not demonstrate a serologic response to the initial vaccines series.

"Preliminary data shows that the beginnings of B-cell reconstitution is also associated with a positive serologic response following a booster of the COVID-19 vaccine," he said.

The authors of the cited studies reported numerous relevant financial disclosures. Spiera and Jyssum reported no relevant financial disclosures.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/967034

Omicron 'sub-lineage' BA.2 designated as COVID variant under investigation, says UK

 The BA.2 form of Omicron has taken hold in countries such as Denmark but so far there doesn't appear too much cause for concern, with experts believing vaccines are effective and hospitalisation levels apparently unchanged. However, there is a possibility it might be more transmissible.

The UK Health Security Agency has designated the Omicron variant sub-lineage, known as BA.2, as a variant under investigation - but current case rates are very low.

Just 53 sequences had been identified in the UK by 10 January, according to the UKHSA, which said it was doing further analysis.

Initial studies from Denmark - where it's quickly taken hold and now makes up around half of Omicron cases - show no difference in hospitalisations between 'original' Omicron and BA.2.

Vaccines are also expected to be effective against BA.2 in fighting severe illness, according to Danish health officials.

However, more data is needed to test whether it could be even more transmissible.

The UKHSA's incident director, Dr Meera Chand, said the altered form of Omicron was not unexpected as it is "the nature of viruses to evolve and mutate".

"Our continued genomic surveillance allows us to detect them and assess whether they are significant," added Dr Chand.

BA.2 is S-gene positive - which may make it harder to show up as Omicron than BA.1, which accounts for 99% of cases.

S-gene target failure helps identify Omicron and can be picked up in PCR tests because as a rule Delta cases have the S-gene and Omicron cases don't.

Some 2,093 sequences of BA.2 had been recorded on an online database from 22 countries - including the UK, the UKHSA said last week.

Denmark's Statens Serum Institut, part of its ministry of health, has said hospitalisations appear to show no difference for the two Omicron lineages but that "analyses regarding infectiousness and vaccine efficiency etc. are ongoing".

"It is expected that vaccines also have an effect against severe illness upon BA.2 infection," it added.

Some experts have said it's possible the sub-lineage could spread quicker than 'original' Omicron.

https://news.sky.com/story/omicron-sub-lineage-ba-2-designated-as-covid-variant-under-investigation-says-ukhsa-12521718