1325. Recalibrating Estimates of Pneumococcal Disease in Hospitalized Canadian adults from 2010 to 2017 with Use of an Extended Spectrum Serotype-specific Urine Antigen Detection
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Pneumococcal vaccine recommendations in Canada include both age- and risk-based guidance. This study aimed to describe the burden of vaccine-preventable pneumococcal community acquired pneumonia (pCAP) and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) by age in hospitalized adults. Methods Active surveillance for all-cause CAP and IPD in hospitalized adults was performed from 2010 to 2017, including laboratory results, patient demographics, and outcomes. Streptococcus pneumoniae was detected using blood and sputum culture, or urine antigen detection (UAD). Serotype was assigned using Quellung reaction, PCR, or serotype-specific UADs spanning the 24 serotypes in PCV13 and PPV23 vaccines. Data were categorized by age (16-49, 50-64, 65+, and 50+ years) and over time. Results 11129 ACP cases and 216 cases of IPD (non-CAP) were identified. A laboratory test for S. pneumoniae was performed in 8912 of ACP cases, identifying 1264 (14.2%) as pCAP. Compared to non-pCAP, pCAP cases were more likely to be admitted to intensive care units and require mechanical ventilation. These serious outcomes, as well as mortality, were more prominent in bacteremic pCAP and IPD. Risk factors for death in pCAP included aged 75+ years, immune compromising conditions, and BMI < 18.5. When categorized by age, the proportion of individuals aged 65+ years for pCAP and IPD was 49.8% and 48.6%, and the 50-64 year age cohort represented 31.3% and 29.9%, respectively. The contributions of PCV13 and PPV23 serotypes remained relatively stable over time, and overall represented 57.6% and 90.9% for pCAP, and 35.0% and 72.0% for IPD, respectively. Conclusion Seven years following infant PCV13 immunization programs in Canada, PCV13 and PPV23 serotypes in pCAP and IPD remained predominant causes of pneumococcal disease. Serious outcomes were particularly evident in adults 50+, suggesting pneumococcal vaccines should be encouraged in this age group. Disclosures Jason J. LeBlanc, PhD, FCCM, D[ABMM], GSK (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Todd F Hatchette, MD, GSK (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Melissa K. Andrew, MD, PhD, GSK (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Sanofi (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Seqirus (Advisor or Review Panel member) Allison McGeer, MSc,MD,FRCPC,FSHEA, GlaxoSmithKline (Advisor or Review Panel member)Merck (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Louis Valiquette, MD, M.Sc., Cubist (Consultant)GSK (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Consultant)Optimer (Consultant)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Shelly McNeil, FRCPC, MD, GSK (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)Sinofi Pasteur (Grant/Research Support)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».