Search

Background: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) imposes a substantial burden on pediatric hospital capacity in Europe. Promising prophylactic interventions against RSV including monoclonal antibodies (mAb) and maternal immunizations (MI) are close to licensure. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of potential mAb and MI interventions against RSV in infants, for six European countries., Methods: We used a static cohort model to compare costs and health effects of four intervention programs to no program and to each other: year-round MI, year-round mAb, seasonal mAb (October to April), and seasonal mAb plus a catch-up program in October. Input parameters were obtained from national registries and literature. Influential input parameters were identified with the expected value of partial perfect information and extensive scenario analyses (including the impact of interventions on wheezing and asthma)., Results: From the health care payer perspective, and at a price of €50 per dose (mAb and MI), seasonal mAb plus catch-up was cost-saving in Scotland, and cost-effective for willingness-to-pay (WTP) values ≥€20,000 (England, Finland) or €30,000 (Denmark) per quality adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for all scenarios considered, except when using ICD-10 based hospitalization data. For the Netherlands, seasonal mAb was preferred (WTP value: €30,000-€90,000) for most scenarios. For Veneto region (Italy), either seasonal mAb with or without catch-up or MI was preferred, depending on the scenario and WTP value. From a full societal perspective (including leisure time lost), the seasonal mAb plus catch-up program was cost-saving for all countries except the Netherlands., Conclusion: The choice between a MI or mAb program depends on the level and duration of protection, price, availability, and feasibility of such programs, which should be based on the latest available evidence. Future research should focus on measuring accurately age-specific RSV-attributable hospitalizations in very young children., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: ‘PB reports grants from Respiratory Syncytial Virus Consortium in Europe (RESCEU), Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 of the European Commission, Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 116,019 during the conduct of the study; and grants from Pfizer, GSK, Merck and European Commission IMI project PROMISE, outside the submitted work, but he has not received any personal fees or other personal benefits. LB’s institution, UMCU has received major funding (>€100,000 per industrial partner) for investigator initiated studies from AbbVie, MedImmune, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Janssen, Pfizer, MSD and MeMed Diagnostics. UMCU has received major funding for the RSV GOLD study from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and major funding as part of the public private partnership IMI-funded projects (RESCEU and PROMISE). UMCU also has received major funding by Julius Clinical for participating in clinical studies sponsored by MedImmune and Pfizer and minor funding (€1,000–25,000 per industrial partner) for consultation and invited lectures by AbbVie, MedImmune, Ablynx, Bavaria Nordic, MabXience, GSK, Novavax, Pfizer, Moderna. TH declared consultancy fees from Sanofi and Janssen for Ad hoc advisory board meeting and honoraria for Lecture on the burden of RSV in children from Jassen and MSD, outside the submitted work. JvS’s institution, Nivel has received unrestricted research grants from WHO, Sanofi and the Foundation for Influenza Epidemiology for work outside the submitted work. CR declared consultancy fees for Ad hoc advisory board meeting and honoraria for Lecture from Seqirus, MSD, Sanofi, outside of the submitted work. ST was an employee of IVIDATA during the conduct of the study, and her employer received consultancy fees from Sanofi. All other authors report no potential conflicts.’, (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vancomycin is the most widely used antibiotic for neonatal Gram-positive sepsis, but clinical outcome data of dosing strategies are scarce. The NeoVanc programme comprised extensive preclinical studies to inform a randomised controlled trial to assess optimised vancomycin dosing. We compared the efficacy of an optimised regimen to a standard regimen in infants with late onset sepsis that was known or suspected to be caused by Gram-positive microorganisms., Methods: NeoVanc was an open-label, multicentre, phase 2b, parallel-group, randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing the efficacy and toxicity of an optimised regimen of vancomycin to a standard regimen in infants aged 90 days or younger. Infants with at least three clinical or laboratory sepsis criteria or confirmed Gram-positive sepsis with at least one clinical or laboratory criterion were enrolled from 22 neonatal intensive care units in Greece, Italy, Estonia, Spain, and the UK. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the optimised regimen (25 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 15 mg/kg every 12 h or 8 h dependent on postmenstrual age, for 5 ± 1 days) or the standard regimen (no loading dose; 15 mg/kg every 24 h, 12 h, or 8 h dependent on postmenstrual age for 10 ± 2 days). Vancomycin was administered intravenously via 60 min infusion. Group allocation was not masked to local investigators or parents. The primary endpoint was success at the test of cure visit (10 ± 1 days after the end of actual vancomycin therapy) in the per-protocol population, where success was defined as the participant being alive at the test of cure visit, having a successful outcome at the end of actual vancomycin therapy, and not having a clinically or microbiologically significant relapse or new infection requiring antistaphylococcal antibiotics for more than 24 h within 10 days of the end of actual vancomycin therapy. The non-inferiority margin was -10%. Safety was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02790996)., Findings: Between March 3, 2017, and July 29, 2019, 242 infants were randomly assigned to the standard regimen group (n=122) or the optimised regimen group (n=120). Primary outcome data in the per-protocol population were available for 90 infants in the optimised group and 92 in the standard group. 64 (71%) of 90 infants in the optimised group and 73 (79%) of 92 in the standard group had success at test of cure visit; non-inferiority was not confirmed (adjusted risk difference -7% [95% CI -15 to 2]). Incomplete resolution of clinical or laboratory signs after 5 ± 1 days of vancomycin therapy was the main factor contributing to clinical failure in the optimised group. Abnormal hearing test results were recorded in 25 (30%) of 84 infants in the optimised group and 12 (15%) of 79 in the standard group (adjusted risk ratio 1·96 [95% CI 1·07 to 3·59], p=0·030). There were six vancomycin-related adverse events in the optimised group (one serious adverse event) and four in the standard group (two serious adverse events). 11 infants in the intention-to-treat population died (six [6%] of 102 infants in the optimised group and five [5%] of 98 in the standard group)., Interpretation: In the largest neonatal vancomycin efficacy trial yet conducted, no clear clinical impact of a shorter duration of treatment with a loading dose was demonstrated. The use of the optimised regimen cannot be recommended because a potential hearing safety signal was identified; long-term follow-up is being done. These results emphasise the importance of robust clinical safety assessments of novel antibiotic dosing regimens in infants., Funding: EU Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PTH is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence neonatal infection guideline development group. LR is an employee of Therakind. DD obtained a PhD that was funded by Fondazione Penta; the capacity and remit of this PhD was independent and unrelated to involvement with NeoVanc. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In the aftermath of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we revised the cost-effectiveness of the exploited interventions in neonatal intensive care unit, to redefine future strategies for hospital management. Costs were revised with respect to the lockdown R0 or under different R0 scenarios to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the screening program adopted. Weekly nasopharyngeal swabs for parents, neonates, and personnel were the major cost during the pandemic, although they effectively reduced the number of cases in our unit.Conclusion: Parents and healthcare personnel testing appears to be an effective strategy due to the high number of contact they have within the hospital environment and outside, able to minimize the cases within our unit. What is Known: • Costs of universal COVID-19 tests for parents, neonates, and NICU personnel have not been evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic in neonatal intensive care unit in Europe. What is New: • Weekly nasopharyngeal swabs for parents, neonates, and personnel were the major cost during the COVID-19 pandemic in NICU. • Parents and healthcare personnel testing was effective to reduce costs related to COVID-19 due to the high number of contact they have within the hospital environment and outside.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading viral pathogen associated with acute lower respiratory tract infection and hospitalization in children < 5 years of age worldwide. While there are known clinical risk factors for severe RSV infection, the majority of those hospitalized are previously healthy infants. There is consequently an unmet need to identify biomarkers that predict host response, disease severity, and sequelae. The primary objective is to identify biomarkers of severe RSV acute respiratory tract infection (ARTI) in infants. Secondary objectives include establishing biomarkers associated with respiratory sequelae following RSV infection and characterizing the viral load, RSV whole-genome sequencing, host immune response, and transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic and epigenetic signatures associated with RSV disease severity. Six hundred thirty infants will be recruited across 3 European countries: the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Participants will be recruited into 2 groups: (1) infants with confirmed RSV ARTI (includes upper and lower respiratory tract infections), 500 without and 50 with comorbidities; and (2) 80 healthy controls. At baseline, participants will have nasopharyngeal, blood, buccal, stool, and urine samples collected, plus complete a questionnaire and 14-day symptom diary. At convalescence (7 weeks ± 1 week post-ARTI), specimen collection will be repeated. Laboratory measures will be correlated with symptom severity scores to identify corresponding biomarkers of disease severity., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03756766., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection is a leading cause of hospitalisation in early childhood and palivizumab is the only licensed intervention for prevention. Palivizumab guidelines should reflect the latest evidence, in addition to cost-effectiveness and healthcare budgetary considerations. RSV experts from Europe, Canada and Israel undertook a systematic review of the evidence over the last 5 years and developed recommendations regarding prophylaxis in industrialised countries. Almost 400 publications were reviewed. This group recommended palivizumab for: preterm infants (<29 and ≤31 weeks gestational age [wGA] and ≤9 and ≤6 months of age, respectively; high-risk 32-35wGA), former preterm children ≤24 months with chronic lung disease/bronchopulmonary dysplasia, children ≤24 months with significant congenital heart disease; and other high-risk populations, such as children ≤24 months with Down syndrome, pulmonary/neuromuscular disorders, immunocompromised, and cystic fibrosis. Up to 5 monthly doses should be administered over the RSV season. It is our impression that the adoption of these guidelines would help reduce the burden of RSV., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The diagnosis of asthma is currently based on clinical history, physical examination and lung function, and to date, there are no accurate objective tests either to confirm the diagnosis or to discriminate between different types of asthma. This consensus exercise reviews the state of the art in asthma diagnosis to identify opportunities for future investment based on the likelihood of their successful development, potential for widespread adoption and their perceived impact on asthma patients. Using a two-stage e-Delphi process and a summarizing workshop, a group of European asthma experts including health professionals, researchers, people with asthma and industry representatives ranked the potential impact of research investment in each technique or tool for asthma diagnosis and monitoring. After a systematic review of the literature, 21 statements were extracted and were subject of the two-stage Delphi process. Eleven statements were scored 3 or more and were further discussed and ranked in a face-to-face workshop. The three most important diagnostic/predictive tools ranked were as follows: "New biological markers of asthma (eg genomics, proteomics and metabolomics) as a tool for diagnosis and/or monitoring," "Prediction of future asthma in preschool children with reasonable accuracy" and "Tools to measure volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath.", (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FE NO ) is used in monitoring of asthma., Objectives: The aim of this multicenter study was to establish normal values of FE NO and assess feasibility in children with a standardized method and equipment approved for clinical use., Methods: FE NO was measured in healthy subjects of 4 to 17 years according to American Thoracic Society guidelines (single breath online, exhalation flow 50 mL/s) with a chemiluminescence analyzer (NIOX Exhaled Nitric Oxide Monitoring System, Aerocrine, Sweden) in 3 European and 2 US centers. Each child performed 3 acceptable nitric oxide measurements within 6 attempts and completed an extended International Study of Asthma and Allergy in Children questionnaire., Results: Measurement of FE NO was attempted in 522 children. Four hundred five children completed the study according to the protocol. Geometric mean FE NO in 405 children was 9.7 ppb, and the upper 95% confidence limit was 25.2 ppb. FE NO increased significantly with age, and higher FE NO was seen in children with self-reported rhinitis/conjunctivitis or hay fever. The success rate was age-dependent and improved from 40% in the children 4 years old to almost 100% from the age of 10 years. The repeatability of 3 approved measurements was 1.6 ppb (95% CI, 1.49-1.64 ppb)., Conclusion: FE NO in healthy children is below 15 to 25 ppb depending on age and self-reported atopy. Measurement of FE NO by NIOX is simple and safe and has a good repeatability. Feasibility depends on age and may be difficult in the preschool child.