Author
Lyn Finelli
Other affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Bio: Lyn Finelli is an academic researcher from Merck & Co.. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Vaccination. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 40 publications receiving 14935 citations. Previous affiliations of Lyn Finelli include Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: Because there is no vaccine and no post-exposure prophylaxis for HCV, the focus of primary prevention efforts should be safer blood supply in the developing world, safe injection practices in health care and other settings, and decreasing the number of people who initiate injection drug use.
Abstract: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of liver disease worldwide and a potential cause of substantial morbidity and mortality in the future. The complexity and uncertainty related to the geographic distribution of HCV infection and chronic hepatitis C, determination of its associated risk factors, and evaluation of cofactors that accelerate its progression, underscore the difficulties in global prevention and control of HCV. Because there is no vaccine and no post-exposure prophylaxis for HCV, the focus of primary prevention efforts should be safer blood supply in the developing world, safe injection practices in health care and other settings, and decreasing the number of people who initiate injection drug use.
2,865 citations
••
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention1, University of Cambridge2, National Institutes of Health3, Erasmus University Rotterdam4, Naval Medical Center San Diego5, Arizona State University6, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment7, Oklahoma State Department of Health8, Wadsworth Center9, Ohio Department of Health10, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control11, Dallas County12, Baylor College of Medicine13, San Diego State University14, Centra15, California Health and Human Services Agency16, Marshfield Clinic17, Michigan Department of Community Health18
TL;DR: The lack of similarity between the 2009 A(H1N1) virus and its nearest relatives indicates that its gene segments have been circulating undetected for an extended period as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Since its identification in April 2009, an A(H1N1) virus containing a unique combination of gene segments from both North American and Eurasian swine lineages has continued to circulate in humans. The lack of similarity between the 2009 A(H1N1) virus and its nearest relatives indicates that its gene segments have been circulating undetected for an extended period. Its low genetic diversity suggests that the introduction into humans was a single event or multiple events of similar viruses. Molecular markers predictive of adaptation to humans are not currently present in 2009 A(H1N1) viruses, suggesting that previously unrecognized molecular determinants could be responsible for the transmission among humans. Antigenically the viruses are homogeneous and similar to North American swine A(H1N1) viruses but distinct from seasonal human A(H1N1).
2,393 citations
••
TL;DR: Data suggest that the use of antiviral drugs was beneficial in hospitalized patients, especially when such therapy was initiated early, and patients seemed to benefit from antiviral therapy.
Abstract: BACKGROUND During the spring of 2009, a pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged and spread globally. We describe the clinical characteristics of patients who were hospitalized with 2009 H1N1 influenza in the United States from April 2009 to mid-June 2009. METHODS Using medical charts, we collected data on 272 patients who were hospitalized for at least 24 hours for influenza-like illness and who tested positive for the 2009 H1N1 virus with the use of a real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay. RESULTS Of the 272 patients we studied, 25% were admitted to an intensive care unit and 7% died. Forty-five percent of the patients were children under the age of 18 years, and 5% were 65 years of age or older. Seventy-three percent of the patients had at least one underlying medical condition; these conditions included asthma; diabetes; heart, lung, and neurologic diseases; and pregnancy. Of the 249 patients who underwent chest radiography on admission, 100 (40%) had findings consistent with pneumonia. Of the 268 patients for whom data were available regarding the use of antiviral drugs, such therapy was initiated in 200 patients (75%) at a median of 3 days after the onset of illness. Data suggest that the use of antiviral drugs was beneficial in hospitalized patients, especially when such therapy was initiated early. CONCLUSIONS During the evaluation period, 2009 H1N1 influenza caused severe illness requiring hospitalization, including pneumonia and death. Nearly three quarters of the patients had one or more underlying medical conditions. Few severe illnesses were reported among persons 65 years of age or older. Patients seemed to benefit from antiviral therapy.
1,586 citations
••
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention1, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases2, California Department of Public Health3, Arizona Department of Health Services4, Michigan Department of Community Health5, Texas Department of State Health Services6, Chicago Department of Public Health7, Massachusetts Department of Public Health8
TL;DR: Cases and deaths associated with pandemic H1N1 virus in pregnant women identified in the USA during the first month of the present outbreak lend support to the present recommendation to promptly treat pregnant women with H 1N1 influenza virus infection with anti-influenza drugs.
1,246 citations
••
TL;DR: Making progress towards the elimination of HBV transmission will require sustainable vaccination programs with improved vaccination coverage, practical methods of measuring the impact of vaccination programs, and targeted vaccination efforts for communities at high risk of infection.
Abstract: Worldwide, two billion people have been infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV), 360 million have chronic infection, and 600,000 die each year from HBV-related liver disease or hepatocellular carcinoma. This comprehensive review of hepatitis B epidemiology and vaccines focuses on definitive and influential studies and highlights current trends, policies, and directions. HBV can be transmitted vertically, through sexual or household contact, or by unsafe injections, but chronic infections acquired during infancy or childhood account for a disproportionately large share of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Vaccination against HBV infection can be started at birth and provides long-term protection against infection in more than 90% of healthy people. In the 1990s, many industrialized countries and a few less-developed countries implemented universal hepatitis B immunization and experienced measurable reductions in HBV-related disease. For example, in Taiwan, the prevalence of chronic infection in children declined by more than 90%. Many resource-poor nations have recently initiated universal hepatitis B immunization programs with assistance from the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization. Further progress towards the elimination of HBV transmission will require sustainable vaccination programs with improved vaccination coverage, practical methods of measuring the impact of vaccination programs, and targeted vaccination efforts for communities at high risk of infection.
1,028 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
Cooper University Hospital1, St George's Hospital2, Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island3, Emory University4, University of Colorado Denver5, McMaster University6, Washington University in St. Louis7, University of Chicago8, University of Jena9, Rush University Medical Center10, University of Pittsburgh11, University of Pennsylvania12, Federal University of São Paulo13, University of Toronto14, Royal Perth Hospital15, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust16, Université libre de Bruxelles17
TL;DR: An update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008 is provided.
Abstract: Objective:To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008.Design:A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at ke
9,137 citations
••
Brown University1, St George's Hospital2, Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island3, Emory University Hospital4, Hebrew University of Jerusalem5, Denver Health Medical Center6, McMaster University7, Barnes-Jewish Hospital8, University of Chicago9, California Pacific Medical Center10, University of Jena11, Rush University Medical Center12, University of Pittsburgh13, University of Pennsylvania14, Federal University of São Paulo15, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre16, Royal Perth Hospital17, St Thomas' Hospital18
TL;DR: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened in 2008 to provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock".
Abstract: To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008. A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7–9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a Pao
2/Fio
2 ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao
2/Fi
o
2 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5–10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven “absolute”’ adrenal insufficiency (2C). Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.
6,283 citations
01 Aug 2000
TL;DR: Assessment of medical technology in the context of commercialization with Bioentrepreneur course, which addresses many issues unique to biomedical products.
Abstract: BIOE 402. Medical Technology Assessment. 2 or 3 hours. Bioentrepreneur course. Assessment of medical technology in the context of commercialization. Objectives, competition, market share, funding, pricing, manufacturing, growth, and intellectual property; many issues unique to biomedical products. Course Information: 2 undergraduate hours. 3 graduate hours. Prerequisite(s): Junior standing or above and consent of the instructor.
4,833 citations
••
TL;DR: The new STD treatment guidelines for gonorrhea, chlamydia, bacterial vaginosis, trichomonas, vulvovaginal candidiasis, pelvic inflammatory disease, genital warts, herpes simplex virus infection, syphilis, and scabies are reviewed.
Abstract: The MMWR series of publications is published by the Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA 30333.
4,563 citations
••
TL;DR: Wild aquatic bird populations have long been considered the natural reservoir for influenza A viruses with virus transmission from these birds seeding other avian and mammalian hosts, but recent studies in bats have suggested other reservoir species may also exist.
4,155 citations