WHO Working Group on revision of the Manual of Laboratory Methods for Testing DTP Vaccines—Report of two meetings held on 20–21 July 2006 and 28–30 March 2007, Geneva, Switzerland

Corbel, Michael J.; Das, Rose Gaines; Lei, Dianliang; Xing, Dorothy; Horiuchi, Yoshinobu; Dobbelaer, R.

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.02.013

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this reported case, the donor had no detectable abnormalities on the chest X-ray and AFB-negative smears, whereas the culture became positive two months after procurement. Although sputum culture has higher sensitivity than AFB [29], the time to positivity ranges from weeks to months [29][30][31][32]. In this situation, molecular tests present greater sensitivity and specificity but are done when pulmonary TB is suspected [30,31].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Donor-Derived Tuberculosis: A Case Report and the Role of Communication Gaps in Transplantation Safety

Clemente

Faria

Cota

et al. 2021

Case Reports in Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Donor-derived tuberculosis (DD-TB) accounts for less than 5% of TB cases and is considered a rare event. In the transplant setting, the frequency of active TB is estimated to be 20 to 74 times higher than that in the general population, and it is associated with high mortality. In this context, the main strategy to minimize the risk of DD transmission is to identify high-risk donors. Despite screening recommendations, failures may result in a breakdown of safety that ends in the transmission of potentially fatal diseases. This report describes a case of DD-TB and emphasizes communication gaps that may occur between organ procurement organizations and transplant centers. Failure in reporting results, lack of exchanging information regarding recipients from the same donor, and inefficient communication between organ procurement organizations and transplant centers are lacks that may be prevented by a more efficient approach towards screening protocols and communication.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Donor-Derived Tuberculosis: A Case Report and the Role of Communication Gaps in Transplantation Safety

Clemente

Faria

Cota

et al. 2021

Case Reports in Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neste momento não existem vacinas comercializadas em Portugal contendo timerosal. A OMS publica normas para assegurar o controlo da segurança das vacinas, [17][18][19] mas é fácil admitir que não existe nenhum procedimento que seja totalmente seguro. A maioria das reações às vacinas é ligeira e autolimitada como dor, rubor local e sintomas gerais de febrícula e mal-estar inespecífico, mas as raras reações graves como choque anafilático, alterações neurológicas e cegueira também estão descritas.…”

Section: N Bcg Hvb Vat Vad Vape Vip Hib Vas Var Parotidite Menc-conj unclassified

Recusa vacinal – o ponto de vista ético

Santos

Hespanhol

2013

RPMGF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A vacinação define-se como o processo pelo qual a inoculação de um agente no corpo, seja um microrganismo ou uma substância, produz imunidade para uma determinada doença. 1 A sua origem histórica perde-se nos primórdios do segundo milénio, com relatos chineses de inoculações variólicas para prevenção da varíola, o mesmo acontecendo em África e na Turquia, onde aliás teve origem a técnica que, em 1720, Lady Montagu introduziu em Inglaterra. 2 Foi, no entanto, Edward Jenner quem trouxe uma abordagem de experimentação científica e em 1798 publicou os resultados da eficácia da inoculação do vírus da vaccinia (varíola bovina) na prevenção da varíola humana em 23 indivíduos, dando início à era moderna da vacinação. Demoraria quase um século para os trabalhos de Louis Pasteur trazerem algum incremento nesta área, com a descoberta da atenuação da virulência do agente, levando a uma explosão de conhecimento, traduzida pela descrição das vacinas contra a raiva e contra o antraz. A evolução ditou a erradicação da varíola, com o último caso descrito em 1977 A vacinação constitui uma das maiores vitórias da Medicina moderna, permitindo a prevenção de mais casos de doença e morte precoce do que qualquer outro tratamento médico. No entanto, o sucesso alcançado na diminuição do número de novos casos pode fazer esmorecer a motivação para o prosseguir, levando ao aparecimento de argumentos anti-vacinação que colhem em grupos mediaticamente muito ativos, e fazendo perigar a continuidade dos resultados alcançados.Neste artigo são revistos os aspetos éticos relacionados com a questão da não adesão e recusa à vacinação, enquanto afirmação dos princípios éticos da liberdade e da autonomia, e reflete-se no papel dos profissionais de saúde e instituições nesta matéria.Conclui-se que, mais importante do que a formalização de procedimentos para justificar a responsabilidade de quem recusa uma vacina, este momento deve ser encarado como uma oportunidade de fazer educação para a saúde, numa perspetiva de empoderamento do indivíduo e da população na lógica de uma melhor literacia que permita de facto a decisão informada, livre e esclarecida.Recebido em 03/08/2013 Aceite para publicação em 12/10/2013 ABSTRACT AN ETHICAL VIEW OF VACCINE REFUSALVaccination is one of the most important victories of modern medical science. It has prevented more cases of disease and premature death than any other medical treatment. But this success may decrease the motivation to continue with vaccination, resulting in the appearance of arguments against vaccination from groups with high media impact. This may endanger the outcomes achieved.In this article, we review ethical aspects of poor adherence and vaccine refusal as expressions of patient autonomy and liberty. We reflect on the role of health professionals and institutions in addressing this question.We conclude that an episode of vaccine refusal involves much more than the formal procedures undertaken to justify the responsibility of those making the decision. It is an opportunity for health education that m...

show abstract

“…[2][3][4] As a result, extensive data sets have been collected by companies and official medicines control laboratories to assure the quality of successive vaccine lots. 5,6 Much experience with toxoid vaccines has been acquired by using the traditional potency and safety tests in animals. However, although the formaldehyde-induced chemical modifications of the antigen largely determine the quality of toxoid vaccines, little is known about the molecular structure of toxoids.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Formaldehyde-Induced Modifications in Diphtheria Toxin

Metz

Michiels

Uittenbogaard

et al. 2020

Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diphtheria toxoid is produced by detoxification of diphtheria toxin with formaldehyde. This study was performed to elucidate the chemical nature and location of formaldehyde-induced modifications in diphtheria toxoid. Diphtheria toxin was chemically modified using 4 different reactions with the following reagents: (1) formaldehyde and NaCNBH 3 , (2) formaldehyde, (3) formaldehyde and NaCNBH 3 followed by formaldehyde and glycine, and (4) formaldehyde and glycine. The modifications were studied by SDS-PAGE, primary amino group determination, and liquid chromatographyeelectrospray mass spectrometry of chymotryptic digests. Reaction 1 resulted in quantitative dimethylation of all lysine residues. Reaction 2 caused intramolecular cross-links, including the NAD þ-binding cavity and the receptor-binding site. Moreover, A fragments and B fragments were cross-linked by formaldehyde on part of the diphtheria toxoid molecules. Reaction 3 resulted in formaldehyde-glycine attachments, including in shielded areas of the protein. The detoxification reaction typically used for vaccine preparation (reaction 4) resulted in a combination of intramolecular cross-links and formaldehyde-glycine attachments. Both the NAD þ-binding cavity and the receptor-binding site of diphtheria toxin were chemically modified. Although CD4 þ T-cell epitopes were affected to some extent, one universal CD4 þ Tcell epitope remained almost completely unaltered by the treatment with formaldehyde and glycine.

show abstract

WHO Working Group on revision of the Manual of Laboratory Methods for Testing DTP Vaccines—Report of two meetings held on 20–21 July 2006 and 28–30 March 2007, Geneva, Switzerland

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Donor-Derived Tuberculosis: A Case Report and the Role of Communication Gaps in Transplantation Safety

Donor-Derived Tuberculosis: A Case Report and the Role of Communication Gaps in Transplantation Safety

Recusa vacinal – o ponto de vista ético

Identification of Formaldehyde-Induced Modifications in Diphtheria Toxin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About