scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Pio Lopez

Bio: Pio Lopez is an academic researcher from University of Valle. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Population. The author has an hindex of 19, co-authored 54 publications receiving 3170 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Two oral doses of the live attenuated G1P[8] HRV vaccine were highly efficacious in protecting infants against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis, significantly reduced the rate of severe gastroenteropathy from any cause, and were not associated with an increased risk of intussusception.
Abstract: Background The safety and efficacy of an attenuated G1P[8] human rotavirus (HRV) vaccine were tested in a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Methods We studied 63,225 healthy infants from 11 Latin American countries and Finland who received two oral doses of either the HRV vaccine (31,673 infants) or placebo (31,552 infants) at approximately two months and four months of age. Severe gastroenteritis episodes were identified by active surveillance. The severity of disease was graded with the use of the 20-point Vesikari scale. Vaccine efficacy was evaluated in a subgroup of 20,169 infants (10,159 vaccinees and 10,010 placebo recipients). Results The efficacy of the vaccine against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis and against rotavirus-associated hospitalization was 85 percent (P<0.001 for the comparison with placebo) and reached 100 percent against more severe rotavirus gastroenteritis. Hospitalization for diarrhea of any cause was reduced by 42 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 29 to 53 percen...

1,738 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
13 Apr 2021-JAMA
TL;DR: In this paper, a double-blind, randomized trial was conducted at a single site in Cali, Colombia to determine whether ivermectin is an efficacious treatment for mild COVID-19.
Abstract: Importance Ivermectin is widely prescribed as a potential treatment for COVID-19 despite uncertainty about its clinical benefit. Objective To determine whether ivermectin is an efficacious treatment for mild COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants Double-blind, randomized trial conducted at a single site in Cali, Colombia. Potential study participants were identified by simple random sampling from the state’s health department electronic database of patients with symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. A total of 476 adult patients with mild disease and symptoms for 7 days or fewer (at home or hospitalized) were enrolled between July 15 and November 30, 2020, and followed up through December 21, 2020. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive ivermectin, 300 μg/kg of body weight per day for 5 days (n = 200) or placebo (n = 200). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was time to resolution of symptoms within a 21-day follow-up period. Solicited adverse events and serious adverse events were also collected. Results Among 400 patients who were randomized in the primary analysis population (median age, 37 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 29-48]; 231 women [58%]), 398 (99.5%) completed the trial. The median time to resolution of symptoms was 10 days (IQR, 9-13) in the ivermectin group compared with 12 days (IQR, 9-13) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for resolution of symptoms, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.32];P = .53 by log-rank test). By day 21, 82% in the ivermectin group and 79% in the placebo group had resolved symptoms. The most common solicited adverse event was headache, reported by 104 patients (52%) given ivermectin and 111 (56%) who received placebo. The most common serious adverse event was multiorgan failure, occurring in 4 patients (2 in each group). Conclusion and Relevance Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT04405843

246 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In a double-blind randomized controlled trial, the vaccine efficacy of PHiD-CV against community-acquired pneumonia in young children in Panama, Argentina, and Columbia is examined.
Abstract: Background The relationship between pneumococcal conjugate vaccine–induced antibody responses and protection against community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and acute otitis media (AOM) is unclear. This study assessed the impact of the ten-valent pneumococcal nontypable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV) on these end points. The primary objective was to demonstrate vaccine efficacy (VE) in a per-protocol analysis against likely bacterial CAP (B-CAP: radiologically confirmed CAP with alveolar consolidation/pleural effusion on chest X-ray, or non-alveolar infiltrates and C-reactive protein ≥ 40 µg/ml); other protocol-specified outcomes were also assessed. Methods and Findings This phase III double-blind randomized controlled study was conducted between 28 June 2007 and 28 July 2011 in Argentine, Panamanian, and Colombian populations with good access to health care. Approximately 24,000 infants received PHiD-CV or hepatitis control vaccine (hepatitis B for primary vaccination, hepatitis A at booster) at 2, 4, 6, and 15–18 mo of age. Interim analysis of the primary end point was planned when 535 first B-CAP episodes, occurring ≥2 wk after dose 3, were identified in the per-protocol cohort. After a mean follow-up of 23 mo (PHiD-CV, n = 10,295; control, n = 10,201), per-protocol VE was 22.0% (95% CI: 7.7, 34.2; one-sided p = 0.002) against B-CAP (conclusive for primary objective) and 25.7% (95% CI: 8.4%, 39.6%) against World Health Organization–defined consolidated CAP. Intent-to-treat VE was 18.2% (95% CI: 5.5%, 29.1%) against B-CAP and 23.4% (95% CI: 8.8%, 35.7%) against consolidated CAP. End-of-study per-protocol analyses were performed after a mean follow-up of 28–30 mo for CAP and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) (PHiD-CV, n = 10,211; control, n = 10,140) and AOM (n = 3,010 and 2,979, respectively). Per-protocol VE was 16.1% (95% CI: −1.1%, 30.4%; one-sided p = 0.032) against clinically confirmed AOM, 67.1% (95% CI: 17.0%, 86.9%) against vaccine serotype clinically confirmed AOM, 100% (95% CI: 74.3%, 100%) against vaccine serotype IPD, and 65.0% (95% CI: 11.1%, 86.2%) against any IPD. Results were consistent between intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Serious adverse events were reported for 21.5% (95% CI: 20.7%, 22.2%) and 22.6% (95% CI: 21.9%, 23.4%) of PHiD-CV and control recipients, respectively. There were 19 deaths (n = 11,798; 0.16%) in the PHiD-CV group and 26 deaths (n = 11,799; 0.22%) in the control group. A significant study limitation was the lower than expected number of captured AOM cases. Conclusions Efficacy was demonstrated against a broad range of pneumococcal diseases commonly encountered in young children in clinical practice. Trial registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00466947 Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

204 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: TAK-003 was efficacious against symptomatic dengue in countries in which the disease is endemic and the incidence of serious adverse events was similar in the vaccine group and placebo group.
Abstract: Background Dengue, a mosquito-borne viral disease, was designated a World Health Organization top 10 threat to global health in 2019. Methods We present primary efficacy data from part 1 o...

179 citations


Cited by
More filters
20 Mar 2020
TL;DR: The effects of the epidemic caused by the new CoV has yet to emerge as the situation is quickly evolving, and world governments are at work to establish countermeasures to stem possible devastating effects.
Abstract: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), viral diseases continue to emerge and represent a serious issue to public health In the last twenty years, several viral epidemics such as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 to 2003, and H1N1 influenza in 2009, have been recorded Most recently, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012 In a timeline that reaches the present day, an epidemic of cases with unexplained low respiratory infections detected in Wuhan, the largest metropolitan area in China's Hubei province, was first reported to the WHO Country Office in China, on December 31, 2019 Published literature can trace the beginning of symptomatic individuals back to the beginning of December 2019 As they were unable to identify the causative agent, these first cases were classified as "pneumonia of unknown etiology " The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and local CDCs organized an intensive outbreak investigation program The etiology of this illness is now attributed to a novel virus belonging to the coronavirus (CoV) family, COVID-19 On February 11, 2020, the WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, announced that the disease caused by this new CoV was a "COVID-19," which is the acronym of "coronavirus disease 2019" In the past twenty years, two additional coronavirus epidemics have occurred SARS-CoV provoked a large-scale epidemic beginning in China and involving two dozen countries with approximately 8000 cases and 800 deaths, and the MERS-CoV that began in Saudi Arabia and has approximately 2,500 cases and 800 deaths and still causes as sporadic cases This new virus seems to be very contagious and has quickly spread globally In a meeting on January 30, 2020, per the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), the outbreak was declared by the WHO a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) as it had spread to 18 countries with four countries reporting human-to-human transmission An additional landmark occurred on February 26, 2020, as the first case of the disease, not imported from China, was recorded in the United States Initially, the new virus was called 2019-nCoV Subsequently, the task of experts of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) termed it the SARS-CoV-2 virus as it is very similar to the one that caused the SARS outbreak (SARS-CoVs) The CoVs have become the major pathogens of emerging respiratory disease outbreaks They are a large family of single-stranded RNA viruses (+ssRNA) that can be isolated in different animal species For reasons yet to be explained, these viruses can cross species barriers and can cause, in humans, illness ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as MERS and SARS Interestingly, these latter viruses have probably originated from bats and then moving into other mammalian hosts — the Himalayan palm civet for SARS-CoV, and the dromedary camel for MERS-CoV — before jumping to humans The dynamics of SARS-Cov-2 are currently unknown, but there is speculation that it also has an animal origin The potential for these viruses to grow to become a pandemic worldwide seems to be a serious public health risk Concerning COVID-19, the WHO raised the threat to the CoV epidemic to the "very high" level, on February 28, 2020 Probably, the effects of the epidemic caused by the new CoV has yet to emerge as the situation is quickly evolving World governments are at work to establish countermeasures to stem possible devastating effects Health organizations coordinate information flows and issues directives and guidelines to best mitigate the impact of the threat At the same time, scientists around the world work tirelessly, and information about the transmission mechanisms, the clinical spectrum of disease, new diagnostics, and prevention and therapeutic strategies are rapidly developing Many uncertainties remain with regard to both the virus-host interac ion and the evolution of the epidemic, with specific reference to the times when the epidemic will reach its peak At the moment, the therapeutic strategies to deal with the infection are only supportive, and prevention aimed at reducing transmission in the community is our best weapon Aggressive isolation measures in China have led to a progressive reduction of cases in the last few days In Italy, in geographic regions of the north of the peninsula, political and health authorities are making incredible efforts to contain a shock wave that is severely testing the health system In the midst of the crisis, the authors have chosen to use the "Statpearls" platform because, within the PubMed scenario, it represents a unique tool that may allow them to make updates in real-time The aim, therefore, is to collect information and scientific evidence and to provide an overview of the topic that will be continuously updated

2,161 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends routine vaccination of U.S. infants with 3 doses of this rotavirus vaccine administered orally at ages 2, 4, and 6 months.
Abstract: Rotavirus is the most common cause of severe gastroenteritis in infants and young children worldwide. Before initiation of the rotavirus vaccination program in the United States in 2006, approximately 80% of U.S. children had rotavirus gastroenteritis by age 5 years. Each year during the 1990s and early 2000s, rotavirus resulted in approximately 410,000 physician visits, 205,000272,000 emergency department visits, and 55,00070,000 hospitalizations among U.S. infants and children, with total annual direct and indirect costs of approximately $1 billion. In February 2006, a live, oral, human-bovine reassortant rotavirus vaccine (RotaTeq(R) [RV5]) was licensed as a 3-dose series for use among U.S. infants for the prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis, and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended routine use of RV5 among U.S. infants (CDC. Prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis among infants and children: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2006;55[No. RR-12]). In April 2008, a live, oral, human attenuated rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix(R) [RV1]) was licensed as a 2-dose series for use among U.S. infants, and in June 2008, ACIP updated its rotavirus vaccine recommendations to include use of RV1. This report updates and replaces the 2006 ACIP statement for prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis. ACIP recommends routine vaccination of U.S. infants with rotavirus vaccine. RV5 and RV1 differ in composition and schedule of administration. RV5 is to be administered orally in a 3-dose series, with doses administered at ages 2, 4, and 6 months. RV1 is to be administered orally in a 2-dose series, with doses administered at ages 2 and 4 months. ACIP does not express a preference for either RV5 or RV1. The recommendations in this report also address the maximum ages for doses, contraindications, precautions, and special situations for the administration of rotavirus vaccine.

1,619 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Changes include the recommendations for PCV rather than PPSV-23 for pneumococcal vaccination, starting some vaccinations earlier post-transplant, and the addition of recommendations for Varivax, HPV vaccine, and (the non-use of) Zostavax vaccine are included.

1,434 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The estimated number of deaths worldwide in children younger than 5 years due to diarrhoea attributable to rotavirus infection is updated to help advocate for rotav virus vaccine introduction and to monitor the effect of vaccination on mortality once introduced.
Abstract: Summary Background WHO recommends routine use of rotavirus vaccines in all countries, particularly in those with high mortality attributable to diarrhoeal diseases. To establish the burden of life-threatening rotavirus disease before the introduction of a rotavirus vaccine, we aimed to update the estimated number of deaths worldwide in children younger than 5 years due to diarrhoea attributable to rotavirus infection. Methods We used PubMed to identify studies of at least 100 children younger than 5 years who had been admitted to hospital with diarrhoea. Additionally, we required the studies to have a data collection midpoint of the year 2000 or later, to be done in full-year increments, and to assesses diarrhoea attributable to rotavirus with EIAs or polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. We also included data from countries that participated in the WHO-coordinated Global Rotavirus Surveillance Network (consisting of participating member states during 2009) and that met study criteria. For countries that have introduced a rotavirus vaccine into their national immunisation programmes, we excluded data subsequent to the introduction. We classified studies into one of five groups on the basis of region and the level of child mortality in the country in which the study was done. For each group, to obtain estimates of rotavirus-associated mortality, we multiplied the random-effect mean rotavirus detection rate by the 2008 diarrhoea-related mortality figures for countries in that group. We derived the worldwide mortality estimate by summing our regional estimates. Findings Worldwide in 2008, diarrhoea attributable to rotavirus infection resulted in 453 000 deaths (95% CI 420 000–494 000) in children younger than 5 years—37% of deaths attributable to diarrhoea and 5% of all deaths in children younger than 5 years. Five countries accounted for more than half of all deaths attributable to rotavirus infection: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, India, Nigeria, and Pakistan; India alone accounted for 22% of deaths (98 621 deaths). Interpretation Introduction of effective and available rotavirus vaccines could substantially affect worldwide deaths attributable to diarrhoea. Our new estimates can be used to advocate for rotavirus vaccine introduction and to monitor the effect of vaccination on mortality once introduced. Funding None.

1,117 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In low-income countries, infectious diseases still account for a large proportion of deaths, highlighting health inequities largely caused by economic differences, and vaccination can cut health-care costs and reduce these inequities.
Abstract: In low-income countries, infectious diseases still account for a large proportion of deaths, highlighting health inequities largely caused by economic differences. Vaccination can cut health-care costs and reduce these inequities. Disease control, elimination or eradication can save billions of US dollars for communities and countries. Vaccines have lowered the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma and will control cervical cancer. Travellers can be protected against "exotic" diseases by appropriate vaccination. Vaccines are considered indispensable against bioterrorism. They can combat resistance to antibiotics in some pathogens. Noncommunicable diseases, such as ischaemic heart disease, could also be reduced by influenza vaccination. Immunization programmes have improved the primary care infrastructure in developing countries, lowered mortality in childhood and empowered women to better plan their families, with consequent health, social and economic benefits. Vaccination helps economic growth everywhere, because of lower morbidity and mortality. The annual return on investment in vaccination has been calculated to be between 12% and 18%. Vaccination leads to increased life expectancy. Long healthy lives are now recognized as a prerequisite for wealth, and wealth promotes health. Vaccines are thus efficient tools to reduce disparities in wealth and inequities in health.

882 citations