RESUMO

Childhood acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, so, immunostimulants have been used as a preventative measure. Despite this, there is no updated evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of immunostimulant drugs for this purpose. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of immunostimulants in preventing ARTIs in children based on the most recent scientific evidence. Data sources such as PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Google Scholar, and Scopus were searched from 1965 to 10 January 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immunostimulants administered by any method, with placebo to prevent ARTIs on children under 18 years of age without immunodeficiencies, anatomical, genetic, or allergic conditions. In order to analyze data from the studies, we used Review Manager 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020), assessed the certainty of the evidence with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE), and assessed the quality and risk of bias of the studies using the RoB tool 1.0. Further, outcomes were combined and analyzed using meta-analysis, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis. Throughout the review, we included 72 placebo-controlled clinical trials involving 12,229 children. The meta-analyses, however, included only 38 studies (52.8%) with 4643 children (38% of the total) with data on mean number of ARTIs. These studies demonstrated a reduction in the ARTIs (MD -1.12 [95%CI -1.39 to -0.85]) and ratio of means of ARTIs (0.61 [95%CI 0.54-0.69]), corresponding to a percentage reduction of 39% (95%CI, 46%-31%) with moderate-quality data. Nevertheless, since there was considerable to substantial heterogeneity and bias was unclear in all domains in 32 out of 72 trials, the quality of the evidence for efficacy was deemed low. Only 14 trials reported adverse events. The review indicates that immunostimulants reduce the incidence of ARTIs by 40% on average in susceptible children, despite low-quality evidence, heterogeneity, and the possibility of publication bias. However, further studies are needed to establish immunostimulants' safety and efficacy profiles. This review was conducted without the support of any funding and has no registered number.

RESUMO

Background: In children, atopic dermatitis or eczema is the most common inflammatory disease of the skin. According to the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) Phase IIIB in Mexico, 5.8% of children and 4.9% of adolescents had eczema symptoms. In 2012, Global Asthma Network (GAN) was established to update the prevalence of eczema and estimate potential factors contributing to its development. Objective: To estimate the prevalence and associated factors for atopic eczema symptoms and diagnosis in children and adolescents according to GAN Phase I and compare the results with ISAAC Phase IIIB in Mexico. Methods: A cross-sectional, multicenter survey was conducted in 15 Mexican centers during the period of 2015-2017 using the GAN Phase I questionnaires in children (6-7-year-olds) and adolescents (13-14-year-olds). The prevalences obtained from the GAN Phase I study, were compared with ISAAC Phase IIIB results; a Spearman's correlation analysis was conducted between temperature, relative humidity, and altitude and eczema symptoms, and a logistic regression was performed to predict current eczema symptoms by age group. Results: A total of 35 777 children and 41 399 adolescents were included. Since ISAAC Phase IIIB, the prevalence of itchy rash in the past 12 months significantly increased in the children's group [6.6% (95% CI 5.7-7.4) vs 7.8 (95% CI 7.5-8.1), p = 0.000] and adolescents' group [5.8% (95% CI 5.0-6.7) vs 6.7% (95% CI 6.5-7.0), p = 0.000].In the adolescents' group, the prevalence of nocturnal awakenings caused by rash symptoms on more than one night per week had a negative correlation between altitude (Spearman's Rho = -0.558, p value = 0.031), and a positive correlation with the average annual temperature (Spearman's Rho = 0.604, p value = 0.017) and annual relative humidity (Spearman's Rho = 0.742, p value = 0.002). The most significant associations in children were the presence of sneezing or runny or blocked nose in the past 12 months [(OR 3.13, 95% CI 2.60-3.77), p = 0.000], the use of paracetamol in the first year of life ([OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.15-2.01), p = 0.003] and the use of antibiotics in the first year of life [(OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.08-1.55) p = 0.004]. Moreover, altitude at 100-1000 m above sea level was associated with current eczema symptoms in adolescents (p = 0.001). Conclusions: There has been a significant increase in eczema symptoms in both age groups since ISAAC Phase IIIB study. Additionally, eczema symptoms were associated with temperature, relative humidity, asthma, hay fever symptoms, the use of paracetamol and antibiotics.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Information on anaphylaxis among recipients of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains scarce. OBJECTIVE: To identify the observed incidence of anaphylaxis in recipients of different anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. METHODS: A nationwide observational study among recipients of 61,414,803 doses of seven different anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, describing the incidence and characteristics of adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who developed anaphylaxis as an adverse event following immunization (AEFI) against SARS-CoV-2 vaccines between December 24, 2020, and October 15, 2021, in Mexico. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients developed anaphylaxis as an AEFI, for an overall observed incidence of 1.07 cases per 1,000,000 (95% CI 0.84-1.37) administered doses. Eighty-six percent of the patients were female, consistent with previous reports of AEFI to COVID-19 vaccines. mRNA-based vaccine recipients had the highest frequency of anaphylaxis, followed by adenovirus-vectored vaccines and inactivated virus recipients, with an observed incidence of 2.5, 0.7, and 0.2 cases per 1,000,000 doses administered, respectively. Only 46% of the patients received correct treatment with epinephrine as the first-line treatment through the appropriate route and dose. We detected one case of anaphylactic reaction-related death occurring 5 min following immunization with ChAdOx1 nCov-19 for a mortality rate of 1.5% among those who developed this AEFI. CONCLUSIONS: In our population, anaphylactic reactions were infrequent. Our study provides further evidence supporting the security of these newly developed vaccines.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Even though the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic represents a historical challenge, science has had an exponential development, and the current vaccination campaigns are proof of this. Unfortunately, along came misinformation and myths regarding their production and their adverse effects. For this reason, we have considered of utter importance to review anaphylaxis, one of the most feared vaccine adverse events.Anaphylaxis can be defined as a life-threatening acute and systemic allergic reaction, with a wide clinical spectrum, which can be explained by many immunological mechanisms, and whose diagnostic complexity demands the fulfillment of strict criteria. Though infrequent, any vaccine has the potential to trigger anaphylaxis. In the United States, for the new SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, rates from 1:200 000 (Pfizer-BioNTech) to 1:360 000 doses (Moderna) have been estimated. Vaccine adverse events can be mediated by hypersensitivity reactions, either allergic or not. Unlike a typical drug allergy, rarely is the active ingredient responsible for the reaction. Therefore, excipients must be considered during the approach to this problem. Vaccine associated anaphylaxis has to be referred to an allergist so as to guarantee the maximum benefit for the patient and improve the vaccines' security profile.

A pesar de la difícil situación que se enfrenta con la actual pandemia de COVID-19, la ciencia ha tenido un desarrollo exponencial. Si bien la inmunización contra esa enfermedad ha sido posible gracias a ello, desafortunadamente se ha acompañado de desinformación y mitos en torno a su fabricación y reacciones adversas. Por tal razón, es importante revisar una de las reacciones adversas a vacunas más temidas para el personal de salud y la población general, la anafilaxia. La anafilaxia se define como una reacción alérgica aguda y sistémica que puede poner en riesgo la vida; se asocia con distintos mecanismos inmunológicos, factores desencadenantes y manifestaciones clínicas. Su diagnóstico puede ser confuso, por lo que se han establecido diferentes criterios. Todas las inmunizaciones tienen el potencial de desencadenar anafilaxia, aunque este evento es poco frecuente. Respecto de las vacunas contra el coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, en Estados Unidos se ha reportado una tasa de anafilaxia de 1:200 000 para la vacuna Pfizer-BioNTech, y de 1:360 000 para la vacuna de Moderna. Al igual que un fármaco, las vacunas pueden presentar efectos adversos mediados por mecanismos de hipersensibilidad, pero a diferencia de lo que sucede con los medicamentos, el principio activo rara vez es el responsable; es más frecuente que las reacciones indeseadas se deban a los excipientes. La sospecha de una anafilaxia secundaria a su aplicación obliga a una oportuna referencia y a un correcto diagnóstico, tanto para el beneficio del paciente como para mejorar el perfil de seguridad de la vacuna.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) showed a wide variability in prevalence and severity of allergic rhinitis (AR) and rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC), in addition to other atopic diseases (Asher et al, 2006).1 The Global Asthma Network (GAN) has continued to study these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of AR and ARC in children and adolescents in Mexico and to assess their association with different risk factors. METHODS: GAN Phase I is a cross-sectional, multicentre survey carried out in 15 centres corresponding to 14 Mexican cities throughout 2016-2019 using the validated Spanish language version of the GAN Phase I questionnaires. The questionnaires were completed by 35 780 parents of 6-7 year old primary school pupils (children) and by 41 399 adolescents, 13-14 years old. RESULTS: The current and cumulative prevalence of AR was higher in the adolescents (26.2-37.5%, respectively) in comparison to the children (17.9-24.9%, respectively), especially in female participants. This tendency was also observed in the current prevalence of ARC, where 15.1% of female adolescents reported nasal symptoms accompanied with itchy-watery eyes in the past year. The most important risk factors for AR and ARC were the presence of wheezing in the past 12 months, wheezing in the first year of life, the previous diagnosis of asthma and eczema symptoms. Furthermore, allergic symptoms had a negative tendency concerning altitude. CONCLUSION: This is the largest AR epidemiological study ever conducted in Mexico. It shows an increase in AR prevalence, as well as significant associations with modifiable risk factors, which could help to establish recommendations to reduce the burden of this condition.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Global Asthma Network (GAN) was established in 2012 as a development to the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood to improve asthma care globally. OBJECTIVE: To survey asthma, allergic rhinitis and atopic dermatitis in primary and secondary school children and to investigate and evaluate its prevalence, severity, management and risk factors in Mexico. METHODS: GAN Phase I is a cross-sectional, multicentre survey carried out in 15 centres corresponding to 14 Mexican cities throughout 2016-2019 using the validated Spanish language version of the GAN Phase I questionnaires. The questionnaires were completed by parents of 6-7-year-old primary school pupils (school children) and by 13-14-year-old adolescents. RESULTS: A total of 35 780 school children and 41 399 adolescents participated. Wheezing ever prevalence was 26.2% (95% CI 25.8% to 26.7%) in school children and 23.9% (95% CI 23.4% to 24.3%) in adolescents. The corresponding frequencies for current wheeze were 10.2% (95% CI 9.9% to 10.5%) and 11.6% (95% CI 11.2% to 11.9%). In school children, the risk factors for current wheeze were rhinitis (OR 4.484; 95% CI 3.915% to 5.134%) and rash symptoms (OR 1.735; 95% CI 1.461% to 2.059%). For adolescents, rhinitis symptoms (OR 3.492; 95% CI 3.188% to 3.825%) and allergic rhinitis diagnosis (OR 2.144; 95% CI 1.787% to 2.572%) were the most significant. For both groups, there was a negative relation with centres' sea level altitude higher than 1500 m above mean sea level (p<0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The most important risk factors for asthma symptoms in both age groups were the presence of rhinitis and rash symptoms or diagnosis. On the other hand, sea level altitude higher than 1500 metres was a protective factor.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: According to the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) methodology, in 2003, the prevalence of asthma symptoms in children 6-7 years old and adolescents 13-14 years old was 11.6% and 13.7%, respectively. Since then, the number of asthma cases has increased worldwide. The study was conducted in several districts in northern Mexico City to evaluate the prevalence of asthma in these age groups and examine possible risk factors. The data were compared to the 2003 results from the same area. METHODS: This was a comparative cross-sectional study following the official Global Asthma Network (GAN) methodology. The parents or guardians of participants completed a questionnaire that explored demographics, asthma symptoms, diagnoses, and possible risk factors. Central tendency measurements were determined for statistical analysis and chi-squared distribution for possible risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 2515 children aged 6-7 years and 3375 adolescents aged 13-14 years participated in the study. Compared to the ISAAC results, we found a greater prevalence of wheezing in both children (at some time in life, 19.2% vs. 27.1%; over the last year, 6.8% vs. 10.6%) and adolescents (at some time in life, 16.9% vs. 19.7%), and for children with an asthma diagnosis (4.5% vs. 5.1%). For both groups, the most common risk factor associated with wheezing was the presence of rhinitis symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma symptoms are highly prevalent in Mexico City, occurring in almost 20% of adolescents. Compared to a decade ago, there was a 7.9% increase in the prevalence of asthma symptoms in children. Almost half of the children and adolescents presenting with symptoms had experienced more than four episodes per year. However, less than 50% of children and adolescents with asthma symptoms had been diagnosed with this disorder, suggesting under-diagnosis.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Children that attend day-care centers frequently contract acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). ARTIs represent a burden for both children and parents. Systematic reviews on the use of immunostimulants for the prevention of juvenile recurrent ARTIs have provided moderate evidence of efficacy and safety. The aim of the study was to establish whether the immunostimulant, OM-85, was cost-effective in preventing ARTIs in children 2-6 years old that attended day-care centers or preschools in Mexico. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of OM-85. For costs, we assumed an institutional perspective, which included the costs of care and supplies over a study period of six months, during the autumn-winter seasons. We created decision trees and constructed a model to identify pharmacoeconomic parameters. We generated 1000 estimations with the bootstrap method to calculate descriptive statistics of pharmacoeconomic parameters. We evaluated cost-effectiveness compared to treatment without immunostimulants. RESULTS: The mean (SD) incidences of ARTIs were 5.59 ± 0.29 without immunostimulants and 2.97 ± 0.32 with OM-85, during the study period. The mean (25th, 75th percentile) direct costs of ARTIs were 57.04 (37.11, 76.39) US$ (US dollars) without immunostimulants and 48.53 (37.35, 58.93) US$ with OM-85, with a mean increment of - 8.51(- 17.08, 0.75) US$, and a mean cost-effectiveness of - 17.94 (- 36.48, 1.66) US$. The direct costs plus the cost of one parent missing work to care for the child with ARTI were 125.76 (102.83, 150.16) US$, without immunostimulant and 85.21 (72.15, 98.81) US$, with OM-85. The increment was - 40.55 (- 68.29, - 13.95) US$, and the cost-effectiveness was - 86.89 (- 142.37, - 29.34) US$.Part of the cost reduction was ascribed to the reduced use of medications, particularly antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Our results were consistent with previous clinical studies conducted in closed institutions in Mexico. OM-85 reduced the number of ARTIs and the frequency of antibiotics use. We concluded that OM-85 was cost-effective for preventing ARTIs in children that attended day-care centers, particularly when parental absenteeism was covered by the institutions.

RESUMO

Obesity in adolescents is considered a major public health problem; combined interventional approaches such as omega-3 supplementation with lifestyle intervention (LI) might exert synergistic effects and exceed the impact of each individual strategy. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate if the supplementation of omega-3 with LI could improve metabolic and endothelial abnormality in obese adolescents with hypertriglyceridemia. The study involved sixty-nine adolescents with normal weight and seventy obese adolescents with hypertriglyceridemia. All obese adolescents were applied to LI and randomly assigned to omega-3 supplementation or placebo group for 12 weeks. The obese adolescents with hypertriglyceridemia presented increased levels of leptin, retinol binding protein 4 (RBP4), selectin E (sE) and asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) and decreased levels of adiponectin compared with control subjects. After 12-week intervention, omega-3 supplementation with LI decreased significantly in triglycerides, HOMA, leptin, RBP4, ADMA and sE. Moreover, omega-3 with LI displayed a significant reduction in triglycerides, ADMA and sE in comparison with LI alone. In subjects with omega-3 combined with LI assessed by multivariate regression model, the reduction in triglycerides was the only independent determinant of the decrease in ADMA. The reductions in triglycerides and HOMA were significantly contributed to the changes in sE. Our data indicated that omega-3 combined with LI in short duration significantly improved dyslipidemia, insulin resistance, abnormality of adipokines, endothelial dysfunction in comparison of LI alone, indicating the combined approach is an effective clinical and applicable strategy to control metabolic abnormality and decrease the risks of cardiovascular diseases in obese adolescents.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There was a need for a solid asthma guideline in Mexico to update and unify asthma management. Because high-quality asthma guidelines exist worldwide, in which the latest evidence on asthma management is summarized, the ADAPTE approach allows for the development of a national asthma guideline based on evidence from already existing guidelines, adapted to national needs. OBJECTIVE: To fuse evidence from the best asthma guidelines and adapt it to local needs with the ADAPTE approach. METHODS: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II asthma guidelines were evaluated by a core group to select 3 primary guidelines. For each step of asthma management, clinical questions were formulated and replied according to (1) evidence in the primary guidelines, (2) safety, (3) Cost, and (4) patient preference. The Guidelines Development Group, composed of a broad range of experts from medical specialties, primary care physicians, and methodologists, adjusted the draft questions and replies in several rounds of a Delphi process and 3 face-to-face meetings, taking into account the reality of the situation in Mexico. We present the results of the pediatric asthma treatment part. RESULTS: Selected primary guidelines are from the British Thoracic Society and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (BTS/SIGN), Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), and Spanish Guidelines on the Management of Asthma (GEMA) 2015, with 2016 updates. Recommendations or suggestions were made for asthma treatment in Mexico. In this article, the detailed analysis of the evidence present in the BTS/SIGN, GINA, and GEMA sections on the (non) pharmacologic treatment of pediatric asthma, education, and devices are presented for 2 age groups: children 5 years or younger and children 6 to 11 years old with asthma. CONCLUSION: For the pediatric treatment and patient education sections, applying the AGREE II and Delphi methods is useful to develop a scientifically sustained document, adjusted to the Mexican situation, as is the Mexican Guideline on Asthma.

Assuntos