• Something wrong with this record ?

Measles in Czech population with varying vaccination rates in 2018-2019: clinical and laboratory differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals and their relevance to clinical practice

D. Smíšková, S. Janovic, P. Kadeřávková, L. Nováková, Z. Blechová, M. Malý, R. Limberková

. 2024 ; 56 (8) : 616-623. [pub] 20240413

Language English Country England, Great Britain

Document type Journal Article

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In a highly vaccinated population, an increasing number of previously vaccinated measles cases can be expected. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of vaccination on the clinical course and immune response in relation to the current measles case definition. METHODS: The presence of fever, catarrhal symptoms, exanthema and complications, and specific IgM and IgG positivity were assessed in all 230 patients and compared in 193 patients with known vaccination status, divided into measles-containing vaccine (MCV) groups: MCV0 (85 patients), MCV1 (25 patients) and MCV2 (83 patients). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between groups were found for catarrhal symptoms. Conjunctivitis and rhinitis were significantly less frequent in the MCV2 group (47% and 54%) compared to MCV0 (80% and 80%), p < 0.001 and p = 0.002 respectively. Typical exanthema was present in 74 (87%) MCV0 and 56 (67%) MCV2 patients, p = 0.005. Complications were most common in the MCV0 group (29%). ECDC clinical case criteria were met in 81 (95%) MCV0, 18 (72%) MCV1 and 59 (71%) MCV2 patients, p < 0.001. IgM were positive in 64 (83%) MCV0, 14 (74%) MCV1 and 36 (67%) MCV2 patients, differences were not statistically significant. There were highly significant differences in IgG between MCV0 and both vaccinated groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A redefinition of the clinical case classification is essential to better capture modified measles and to raise awareness among healthcare workers of the differences in measles in vaccinated patients.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24019600
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20241024110615.0
007      
ta
008      
241015s2024 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1080/23744235.2024.2339870 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38613412
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Smíšková, Dita $u Department of Infectious Diseases, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Bulovka University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000156996474 $7 xx0139471
245    10
$a Measles in Czech population with varying vaccination rates in 2018-2019: clinical and laboratory differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals and their relevance to clinical practice / $c D. Smíšková, S. Janovic, P. Kadeřávková, L. Nováková, Z. Blechová, M. Malý, R. Limberková
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In a highly vaccinated population, an increasing number of previously vaccinated measles cases can be expected. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of vaccination on the clinical course and immune response in relation to the current measles case definition. METHODS: The presence of fever, catarrhal symptoms, exanthema and complications, and specific IgM and IgG positivity were assessed in all 230 patients and compared in 193 patients with known vaccination status, divided into measles-containing vaccine (MCV) groups: MCV0 (85 patients), MCV1 (25 patients) and MCV2 (83 patients). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between groups were found for catarrhal symptoms. Conjunctivitis and rhinitis were significantly less frequent in the MCV2 group (47% and 54%) compared to MCV0 (80% and 80%), p < 0.001 and p = 0.002 respectively. Typical exanthema was present in 74 (87%) MCV0 and 56 (67%) MCV2 patients, p = 0.005. Complications were most common in the MCV0 group (29%). ECDC clinical case criteria were met in 81 (95%) MCV0, 18 (72%) MCV1 and 59 (71%) MCV2 patients, p < 0.001. IgM were positive in 64 (83%) MCV0, 14 (74%) MCV1 and 36 (67%) MCV2 patients, differences were not statistically significant. There were highly significant differences in IgG between MCV0 and both vaccinated groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A redefinition of the clinical case classification is essential to better capture modified measles and to raise awareness among healthcare workers of the differences in measles in vaccinated patients.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a spalničky $x prevence a kontrola $x imunologie $7 D008457
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a spalničková vakcína $x aplikace a dávkování $x imunologie $7 D008458
650    _2
$a předškolní dítě $7 D002675
650    12
$a vakcinace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D014611
650    _2
$a dítě $7 D002648
650    12
$a imunoglobulin M $x krev $7 D007075
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a imunoglobulin G $x krev $7 D007074
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a kojenec $7 D007223
650    _2
$a protilátky virové $x krev $7 D000914
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
651    _2
$a Česká republika $x epidemiologie $7 D018153
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Janovic, Simona $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Kadeřávková, Pavlína $u Department of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Bulovka, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Nováková, Ludmila $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Blechová, Zuzana $u Department of Infectious Diseases, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Bulovka University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Malý, Marek $u Department of Biostatistics, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Limberková, Radomíra $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00191578 $t Infectious diseases (London, England) $x 2374-4243 $g Roč. 56, č. 8 (2024), s. 616-623
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38613412 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20241015 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20241024110609 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2202061 $s 1231573
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 56 $c 8 $d 616-623 $e 20240413 $i 2374-4243 $m Infectious diseases (London, England) $n Infect Dis (Lond) $x MED00191578
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20241015

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...