BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity in temperature-mortality relationships across locations may partly result from differences in the demographic structure of populations and their cause-specific vulnerabilities. Here we conduct the largest epidemiological study to date on the association between ambient temperature and mortality by age and cause using data from 532 cities in 33 countries. METHODS: We collected daily temperature and mortality data from each country. Mortality data was provided as daily death counts within age groups from all, cardiovascular, respiratory, or noncardiorespiratory causes. We first fit quasi-Poisson regression models to estimate location-specific associations for each age-by-cause group. For each cause, we then pooled location-specific results in a dose-response multivariate meta-regression model that enabled us to estimate overall temperature-mortality curves at any age. The age analysis was limited to adults. RESULTS: We observed high temperature effects on mortality from both cardiovascular and respiratory causes compared to noncardiorespiratory causes, with the highest cold-related risks from cardiovascular causes and the highest heat-related risks from respiratory causes. Risks generally increased with age, a pattern most consistent for cold and for nonrespiratory causes. For every cause group, risks at both temperature extremes were strongest at the oldest age (age 85 years). Excess mortality fractions were highest for cold at the oldest ages. CONCLUSIONS: There is a differential pattern of risk associated with heat and cold by cause and age; cardiorespiratory causes show stronger effects than noncardiorespiratory causes, and older adults have higher risks than younger adults.

• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

This study compared decitabine exposure when administered IV (DEC-IV) at a dose of 20 mg/m2 for 5-days with orally administered decitabine with cedazuridine (DEC-C), as well as the clinical efficacy and safety of DEC-C in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) who were ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy. In all, 89 patients were randomised 1:1 to DEC-IV or oral DEC-C (days 1-5 in a 28-day treatment cycle), followed by 5 days of the other formulation in the next treatment cycle. All patients received oral DEC-C for subsequent treatment cycles until treatment discontinuation. Equivalent systemic decitabine exposures were demonstrated (5-day area under the curve ratio between the two decitabine formulations of 99.64 [90% confidence interval 91.23%, 108.80%]). Demethylation rates also were similar (≤1.1% difference). Median overall survival (OS), clinical response and safety profile with oral DEC-C were consistent with those previously observed with DEC-IV. Next-generation sequencing was performed to identify molecular abnormalities that impact OS and TP53 mutations were associated with a poor outcome. These findings support the use of oral DEC-C in patients with AML.

• MeSH
• Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute * drug therapy   mortality   MeSH
• Administration, Oral MeSH
• Decitabine * administration & dosage   pharmacokinetics   adverse effects   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Administration, Intravenous MeSH
• Cross-Over Studies MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * therapeutic use   pharmacokinetics   adverse effects   administration & dosage   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Uridine * analogs & derivatives   administration & dosage   pharmacokinetics   adverse effects   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, may have efficacy in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer who do not have disease progression after standard concurrent platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients to receive durvalumab at a dose of 1500 mg, durvalumab (1500 mg) plus tremelimumab at a dose of 75 mg (four doses only), or placebo every 4 weeks for up to 24 months. Randomization was stratified according to disease stage (I or II vs. III) and receipt of prophylactic cranial irradiation (yes vs. no). Results of the first planned interim analysis of the two primary end points of overall survival and progression-free survival (assessed on the basis of blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1) with durvalumab as compared with placebo (data cutoff date, January 15, 2024) are reported; results in the durvalumab-tremelimumab group remain blinded. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients were assigned to the durvalumab group, 200 to the durvalumab-tremelimumab group, and 266 to the placebo group. Durvalumab therapy led to significantly longer overall survival than placebo (median, 55.9 months [95% confidence interval {CI}, 37.3 to not reached] vs. 33.4 months [95% CI, 25.5 to 39.9]; hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 98.321% CI, 0.54 to 0.98; P = 0.01), as well as to significantly longer progression-free survival (median 16.6 months [95% CI, 10.2 to 28.2] vs. 9.2 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.9]; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.76; 97.195% CI, 0.59 to 0.98; P = 0.02). The incidence of adverse events with a maximum grade of 3 or 4 was 24.4% among patients receiving durvalumab and 24.2% among patients receiving placebo; adverse events led to discontinuation in 16.4% and 10.6% of the patients, respectively, and led to death in 2.7% and 1.9%. Pneumonitis or radiation pneumonitis with a maximum grade of 3 or 4 occurred in 3.1% of the patients in the durvalumab group and in 2.6% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with durvalumab led to significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than placebo among patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ADRIATIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03703297.).

• MeSH
• Chemotherapy, Adjuvant adverse effects   MeSH
• Survival Analysis MeSH
• Chemoradiotherapy * adverse effects   MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival * MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Double-Blind Method MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized * therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Cranial Irradiation adverse effects   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Small Cell Lung Carcinoma * drug therapy   mortality   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal * therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Lung Neoplasms * drug therapy   mortality   pathology   therapy   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Neoplasm Staging MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

BACKGROUND: Recurrent cervical cancer is a life-threatening disease, with limited treatment options available when disease progression occurs after first-line combination therapy. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, multinational, open-label trial of tisotumab vedotin as second- or third-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive tisotumab vedotin monotherapy (2.0 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks) or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (topotecan, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, irinotecan, or pemetrexed). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 502 patients underwent randomization (253 were assigned to the tisotumab vedotin group and 249 to the chemotherapy group); the groups were similar with respect to demographic and disease characteristics. The median overall survival was significantly longer in the tisotumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (11.5 months [95% confidence interval {CI}, 9.8 to 14.9] vs. 9.5 months [95% CI, 7.9 to 10.7]), results that represented a 30% lower risk of death with tisotumab vedotin than with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.89; two-sided P = 0.004). The median progression-free survival was 4.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 4.4) with tisotumab vedotin and 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 3.1) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; two-sided P<0.001). The confirmed objective response rate was 17.8% in the tisotumab vedotin group and 5.2% in the chemotherapy group (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.1 to 7.6; two-sided P<0.001). A total of 98.4% of patients in the tisotumab vedotin group and 99.2% in the chemotherapy group had at least one adverse event that occurred during the treatment period (defined as the period from day 1 of dose 1 until 30 days after the last dose); grade 3 or greater events occurred in 52.0% and 62.3%, respectively. A total of 14.8% of patients stopped tisotumab vedotin treatment because of toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recurrent cervical cancer, second- or third-line treatment with tisotumab vedotin resulted in significantly greater efficacy than chemotherapy. (Funded by Genmab and Seagen [acquired by Pfizer]; innovaTV 301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04697628.).

• MeSH
• Survival Analysis MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized * therapeutic use   MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Neoplasm Recurrence, Local * drug therapy   MeSH
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms * drug therapy   mortality   pathology   MeSH
• Oligopeptides * therapeutic use   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori infection poses a significant health burden worldwide, and its virulence factor CagA plays a pivotal role in its pathogenesis. METHODS: In this study, the interaction between H. pylori-infected AGS cells and silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) was investigated, with a focus on the modulation of CagA-mediated responses, investigated by western blotting. Both, the dose-dependent efficacy against H. pylori (growth curves, CFU assay) and the impact of the nanoparticles on AGS cells (MTT assay) were elucidated. RESULTS: AGS cells infected with H. pylori displayed dramatic morphological changes, characterized by elongation and a migratory phenotype, attributed to CagA activity. Preincubation of H. pylori with AgNPs affected these morphological changes in a concentration-dependent manner, suggesting a correlation between AgNPs concentration and CagA function. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the nuanced interplay between host-pathogen interactions and the therapeutic potential of AgNPs in combating H. pylori infection and offers valuable insights into the multifaceted dynamics of CagA mediated responses.

• MeSH
• Anti-Bacterial Agents pharmacology   MeSH
• Antigens, Bacterial * metabolism   MeSH
• Bacterial Proteins * metabolism   MeSH
• Cell Line MeSH
• Epithelial Cells microbiology   MeSH
• Virulence Factors metabolism   MeSH
• Helicobacter pylori * drug effects   MeSH
• Helicobacter Infections * microbiology   drug therapy   MeSH
• Host-Pathogen Interactions MeSH
• Metal Nanoparticles * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Cell Line, Tumor MeSH
• Signal Transduction * drug effects   MeSH
• Silver * pharmacology   metabolism   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

BACKGROUND: Triplet or quadruplet therapies incorporating proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators, and anti-CD38 antibodies have led to prolonged survival among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma; however, most patients have a relapse. Frontline lenalidomide therapy has increased the number of patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease at the time of the first relapse. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (BPd), as compared with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd), in lenalidomide-exposed patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Disease response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent randomization; 155 were assigned to the BPd group, and 147 to the PVd group. At a median follow-up of 21.8 months (range, <0.1 to 39.2), the 12-month estimated progression-free survival with BPd was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63 to 78), as compared with 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with PVd (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.73; P<0.001). Data on overall survival were immature. The percentage of patients with a response to treatment (partial response or better) was 77% (95% CI, 70 to 84) in the BPd group and 72% (95% CI, 64 to 79) in the PVd group; 40% (95% CI, 32 to 48) and 16% (95% CI, 11 to 23), respectively, had a complete response or better. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 94% of the patients in the BPd group and 76% of those in the PVd group. Ocular events occurred in 89% of the patients who received BPd (grade 3 or 4 in 43%) and 30% of those who received PVd (grade 3 or 4 in 2%); ocular events in the BPd group were managed with belantamab mafodotin dose modification. Ocular events led to treatment discontinuation in 9% of the patients in the BPd group and in no patients in the PVd group. CONCLUSIONS: Among lenalidomide-exposed patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma, BPd conferred a significantly greater benefit than PVd with respect to progression-free survival, as well as deeper, more durable responses. Ocular events were common but were controllable by belantamab mafodotin dose modification. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-8 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04484623; EudraCT number, 2018-004354-21.).

• MeSH
• Bortezomib administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Drug Resistance, Neoplasm MeSH
• Dexamethasone * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival * MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Lenalidomide administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Neoplasm Recurrence, Local diagnosis   drug therapy   mortality   MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma * diagnosis   drug therapy   mortality   MeSH
• Eye Diseases chemically induced   epidemiology   MeSH
• Disease Progression MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Recurrence MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Thalidomide * administration & dosage   adverse effects   analogs & derivatives   MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH

BACKGROUND: Belantamab mafodotin had single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, a finding that supports further evaluation of the agent in combination with standard-care therapies. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label, randomized trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (BVd), as compared with daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd), in patients who had progression of multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response duration, and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status. RESULTS: In total, 494 patients were randomly assigned to receive BVd (243 patients) or DVd (251 patients). At a median follow-up of 28.2 months (range, 0.1 to 40.0), median progression-free survival was 36.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.4 to not reached) in the BVd group and 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.1 to 17.5) in the DVd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.53; P<0.001). Overall survival at 18 months was 84% in the BVd group and 73% in the DVd group. An analysis of the restricted mean response duration favored BVd over DVd (P<0.001). A complete response or better plus MRD-negative status occurred in 25% of the patients in the BVd group and 10% of those in the DVd group. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 95% of the patients in the BVd group and 78% of those in the DVd group. Ocular events were more common in the BVd group than in the DVd group (79% vs. 29%); such events were managed with dose modifications, and events of worsening visual acuity mostly resolved. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with DVd therapy, BVd therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among patients who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. Most patients had grade 3 or higher adverse events. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04246047; EudraCT number, 2018-003993-29.).

• MeSH
• Bortezomib * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Dexamethasone * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival * MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma * drug therapy   mortality   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Disease Progression MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Neoplasm, Residual MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH

The goal of the RENEB inter-laboratory comparison 2021 exercise was to simulate a large-scale radiation accident involving a network of biodosimetry labs. Labs were required to perform their analyses using different biodosimetric assays in triage mode scoring and to rapidly report estimated radiation doses to the organizing institution. This article reports the results obtained with the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. Three test samples were exposed to blinded doses of 0, 1.2 and 3.5 Gy X-ray doses (240 kVp, 13 mA, ∼75 keV, 1 Gy/min). These doses belong to 3 triage categories of clinical relevance: a low dose category, for no exposure or exposures inferior to 1 Gy, requiring no direct treatment of subjects; a medium dose category, with doses ranging from 1 to 2 Gy, and a high dose category, after exposure to doses higher than 2 Gy, with the two latter requiring increasing medical attention. After irradiation the test samples (no. 1, no. 2 and no. 3) were sent by the organizing laboratory to 14 centers participating in the micronucleus assay exercise. Laboratories were asked to setup micronucleus cultures and to perform the micronucleus assay in triage mode, scoring 500 binucleated cells manually, or 1,000 binucleated cells in automated/semi-automated mode. One laboratory received no blood samples, but scored pictures from another lab. Based on their calibration curves, laboratories had to provide estimates of the administered doses. The accuracy of the reported dose estimates was further analyzed by the micronucleus assay lead. The micronucleus assay allowed classification of samples in the corresponding clinical triage categories (low, medium, high dose category) in 88% of cases (manual scoring, 88%; semi-automated scoring, 100%; automated scoring, 73%). Agreement between scoring laboratories, assessed by calculating the Fleiss' kappa, was excellent (100%) for semi-automated scoring, good (83%) for manual scoring and poor (53%) for fully automated scoring. Correct classification into triage scoring dose intervals (reference dose ±0.5 Gy for doses ≤2.5 Gy, or reference dose ±1 Gy for doses >2.5 Gy), recommended for triage biodosimetry, was obtained in 79% of cases (manual scoring, 73%; semi-automated scoring, 100%; automated scoring, 67%). The percentage of dose estimates whose 95% confidence intervals included the reference dose was 58% (manual scoring, 48%; semiautomated scoring, 72%; automated scoring, 60%). For the irradiated samples no. 2 and no. 3, a systematic shift towards higher dose estimations was observed. This was also noticed with the other cytogenetic assays in this intercomparison exercise. Accuracy of the rapid triage modality could be maintained when the number of manually scored cells was scaled down to 200 binucleated cells. In conclusion, the micronucleus assay, preferably performed in a semi-automated or manual scoring mode, is a reliable technique to perform rapid biodosimetry analysis in large-scale radiation emergencies.

• MeSH
• Biological Assay methods   MeSH
• Cytokinesis * radiation effects   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Micronucleus Tests methods   MeSH
• Radiometry methods   MeSH
• Radioactive Hazard Release * MeSH
• Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

After large-scale radiation accidents where many individuals are suspected to be exposed to ionizing radiation, biological and physical retrospective dosimetry assays are important tools to aid clinical decision making by categorizing individuals into unexposed/minimally, moderately or highly exposed groups. Quality-controlled inter-laboratory comparisons of simulated accident scenarios are regularly performed in the frame of the European legal association RENEB (Running the European Network of Biological and Physical retrospective Dosimetry) to optimize international networking and emergency readiness in case of large-scale radiation events. In total 33 laboratories from 22 countries around the world participated in the current RENEB inter-laboratory comparison 2021 for the dicentric chromosome assay. Blood was irradiated in vitro with X rays (240 kVp, 13 mA, ∼75 keV, 1 Gy/min) to simulate an acute, homogeneous whole-body exposure. Three blood samples (no. 1: 0 Gy, no. 2: 1.2 Gy, no. 3: 3.5 Gy) were sent to each participant and the task was to culture samples, to prepare slides and to assess radiation doses based on the observed dicentric yields from 50 manually or 150 semi-automatically scored metaphases (triage mode scoring). Approximately two-thirds of the participants applied calibration curves from irradiations with γ rays and about 1/3 from irradiations with X rays with varying energies. The categorization of the samples in clinically relevant groups corresponding to individuals that were unexposed/minimally (0-1 Gy), moderately (1-2 Gy) or highly exposed (>2 Gy) was successfully performed by all participants for sample no. 1 and no. 3 and by ≥74% for sample no. 2. However, while most participants estimated a dose of exactly 0 Gy for the sham-irradiated sample, the precise dose estimates of the samples irradiated with doses >0 Gy were systematically higher than the corresponding reference doses and showed a median deviation of 0.5 Gy (sample no. 2) and 0.95 Gy (sample no. 3) for manual scoring. By converting doses estimated based on γ-ray calibration curves to X-ray doses of a comparable mean photon energy as used in this exercise, the median deviation decreased to 0.27 Gy (sample no. 2) and 0.6 Gy (sample no. 3). The main aim of biological dosimetry in the case of a large-scale event is the categorization of individuals into clinically relevant groups, to aid clinical decision making. This task was successfully performed by all participants for the 0 Gy and 3.5 Gy samples and by 74% (manual scoring) and 80% (semiautomatic scoring) for the 1.2 Gy sample. Due to the accuracy of the dicentric chromosome assay and the high number of participating laboratories, a systematic shift of the dose estimates could be revealed. Differences in radiation quality (X ray vs. γ ray) between the test samples and the applied dose effect curves can partly explain the systematic shift. There might be several additional reasons for the observed bias (e.g., donor effects, transport, experimental conditions or the irradiation setup) and the analysis of these reasons provides great opportunities for future research. The participation of laboratories from countries around the world gave the opportunity to compare the results on an international level.

• MeSH
• Biological Assay methods   MeSH
• Chromosome Aberrations * MeSH
• Chromosomes MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Radiometry methods   MeSH
• Retrospective Studies MeSH
• Radioactive Hazard Release * MeSH
• Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

This article aims to analyze how Nigeria, the 86th ranked State according to the Global Health Security Index (GHS Index), fared through the Covid-19 pandemic by linking its Ebola experience to the pandemic response. The paper will tackle (one of) these questions: Does their response as a State truly reflect the ranking? Or were they, like the rest of the world, truly unprepared and powerless against the outbreak?

• MeSH
• COVID-19 * epidemiology   MeSH
• Disease Outbreaks prevention & control   MeSH
• Epidemiological Monitoring MeSH
• Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola epidemiology   MeSH
• Communicable Disease Control economics   statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Pandemics prevention & control   MeSH
• Socioeconomic Factors MeSH
• Health Planning MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Geographicals
• Nigeria MeSH