Tag Archives: Imperial College London

Deaths from anaphylaxis have halved even though the number of patients in hospital is increasing: Study | Instant News

A study published in the journal BMJ describes the death rate from food-induced anaphylaxis that has halved despite the greatly increased hospital admission rates in the UK due to this life-threatening allergic reaction disease.

Food allergies are the most common cause of a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction, known as anaphylaxis. Substantial increases in hospital admissions due to food anaphylaxis have been reported globally, but it is unclear whether this trend continues, and if so, whether it has led to an increase in fatal reactions.

To explore this further, researchers from Imperial College London’s National Heart & Lung Institute began describing trends in hospital admission times for food anaphylaxis in the UK over the past 20 years.

They studied data between 1998 and 2018, measured trends in time, age, and sex distribution for anaphylactic admissions due to food and non-food triggers, and then compared them to reported deaths.

Between 1998 and 2018, 101,891 people were hospitalized for anaphylaxis. Of these, 30,700 (30%) were coded for food triggers.

Acceptance of food anaphylaxis increased from 1.23 to 4.04 per 100,000 population per year (from 1998 to 2018), an annual increase of 5.7%.

The largest increase in hospital admissions was seen for children under 15 years, with an increase from 2.1 to 9.2 admissions per 100,000 population per year (an annual increase of 6.6%, compared to 5.9% for people aged 15-59 years and 2.1% in those aged 60 years and over).

Over a 20 year period, 152 deaths were identified in which the fatal event may have been due to food-induced anaphylaxis.

The case-fatality rate (number of deaths as a proportion of admissions) decreased from 0.7% to 0.19% for confirmed fatal food anaphylaxis and to 0.3% for food anaphylaxis that was suspected to be fatal.

At least 86 (46%) of all deaths between 1992-2018 were triggered by peanuts or tree nuts, while cow’s milk was responsible for 17 (26%) deaths in school-age children.

The data also show that over the same time period, prescriptions for adrenaline autoinjectors increased 336% – an increase of 11% per year.

The investigators say that improvements in the introduction and management of anaphylaxis may partially explain the reduction in case mortality despite increasing hospital admissions for anaphylaxis.

There is no evidence to suggest that the clinical criteria used to diagnose anaphylaxis have changed in the UK over the study period, they added. Although the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) introduced national guidelines in 2011, which could result in an increase in the number of hospitalized patients, year-on-year increases have continued since then.

The authors acknowledged some of the study limitations, such as the possibility of some miscoded or misdiagnosed anaphylaxis cases, and they were unable to include anaphylaxis cases seen in an emergency department that did not require hospital admission.

However, they do use national data sets in the context of the UK health system, which provides an opportunity to draw strong conclusions compared to other countries.

Thus, the researchers conclude: “Cow’s milk is increasingly being identified as an allergen cause for fatal food reactions, and is now the most common cause of fatal anaphylaxis in children. More education is needed to highlight the specific risks that cow’s milk poses to people. -people who are allergic to raise awareness among the food business. “

They added: “Further work is needed to assess evidence of age-related susceptibility to severe anaphylaxis in young adults, thereby increasing our ability to stratify the risk of patients with food allergies and to reduce the risk of fatal outcomes.”

Follow more stories on Facebook and Indonesia

This story has been published from wire agent bait without modification to the text.


image source

UK Covid-19 variant is growing rapidly, affecting more people under 20 years of age: Study – world news | Instant News

The new variant SARS-CoV-2, which is believed to have originated in the UK, is growing rapidly and affecting more people under 20, according to a study. A collaborative research team from Imperial College London, University of Edinburgh, Public Health England, the Wellcome Sanger Institute, University of Birmingham, and the Covid-19 Genomics UK Consortium evaluated the relationship between the transmission and frequency of new variants over a period of time.

“There is consensus among all analyzes that the VOC (Variant of Concern or new variant) has a substantial transmission advantage,” the study said.

According to research, the number of reproductions of the new variant is currently between 1.4 and 1.8. It is stated that the estimated difference in the mutation reproduction rate is 0.4-0.7 higher than other virus variants. Reproduction numbers reflect the number of people that one individual is expected to infect in a homogeneous population.

Also Read | California announced its first confirmed case of the new Covid-19 variant

The study also found that individuals under 20 years of age had a higher proportion of cases of the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) infected with the new variant. However, the researchers say it is too early to determine the mechanism behind these changes. They suggested that it may be partly because lockdowns were imposed in some places but schools remained open.

“This analysis, which has informed UK government planning in recent weeks, shows that the new variant of concern, B.1.1.7, has much higher transmissibility than the previous SARS-CoV-2 virus circulating in the UK,” Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London said in a statement.

Dr Erik Volz, co-author of the study, said that it is very rare for the virus to change in a way that requires that we re-evaluate public health policies. Volz added that there is ample evidence of new variant transmission changes that must be considered when planning a Covid-19 response in the new year.


image source

‘COVID-19 particles can remain infectious in the air over the staff’ | Instant News

London: Wendy Barclay, chair in influenza Virology at Imperial College London, said that the coronavirus particles may remain infectious in the air for more than an hour. Speaking on the BBC on Sunday, Barclay said, “”This is the first time that the world Health Organization recognized that airborne droplets, contributes to the spread of the disease.

“Of course, there are other routes as well… but what this new evidence means that the route through the air probably helps too in some cases.”

Barclay said that the virus can remain suspended in the air and travel some distance from the person who inhaled them, with laboratory studies showing it can remain infectious in the air for more than an hour. She added that to replenish the air in the room was important to avoid the spread of the virus and not the recirculating air, as in some air conditioning systems to do.

Barclay’s comments came after the world health organization (who) last week recognized that there is new evidence that COVID-19 may extend to the smallest particles suspended in the air, reports the BBC.

On airborne transmission cannot be ruled out in a crowded, enclosed or poorly ventilated areas, the official said. Who officials warn that the evidence is preliminary and requires further evaluation.

If the readings are confirmed, it may affect the guidance for indoor spaces.As of Sunday, the total number of cases of the syndrome were 12,735,924 with 565,489 deaths, according to the Johns Hopkins University.




image source

How Many People Have Coronavirus in January? | Instant News

SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious, but a few dozen imported cases may not be enough to trigger many large undetected outbreaks. Based on related diseases such as SARS and MERS, epidemiologists suspect that the potential spread of the corona virus is irregular. Most likely, some sick people infect many others, but most only infect a few. Alessandro Vespignani, a network scientist and public health professor at Northeastern University, estimates that in every American city that would later become a hot spot for COVID-19, maybe 10 to 20 “local transmission events” occur in January. Apart from one or two infections that spread large outbreaks in places like Seattle and New York, most infections that come from abroad in January will be transmitted to at least a few people, then quickly “fail,” Bedford tells me.

Establishing a more precise number of how many sick people who brought SARS-CoV-2 to the US earlier this year will require data that may be difficult or impossible to collect, especially during a major global health crisis. For one: how many people are really sick with COVID-19 worldwide in January (or earlier). Official data from Wuhan has been unreliable from the start. And countries that have since stepped up efforts to detect their corona virus did not look for cases carefully at the beginning of the year. The World Health Organization does not declare a global health emergency until January 30.

Researchers also need to know where people travel around the world in the early weeks of the pandemic. “One of the big challenges in seeing the true global spread of this disease is that, since January, travel patterns have been massively disrupted,” Gardner said. When researchers do not have perfect travel data for the time and place they are studying, he explained, they often replace or extrapolate from past data. “Sometimes you can say,” Yes, I don’t have 2016 data, but I use 2015 data. That representative. ‘That is no longer valid. “The Chinese government closed Wuhan on January 23; even before that, individual movement patterns might begin to shift in ways that are difficult to trace.


When the living cannot be fully accounted for, one way to move forward is to count deaths. Testing the deficiencies meant that some COVID-19 deaths were not detected, but researchers could better handle how many people were killed by the virus over a certain period of time by looking at excess mortality: how many more people died than expected under normal circumstances.

Last week, the National Center for Health Statistics publish preliminary data about excess weekly deaths since January 2017, which will be renewed when the pandemic starts. Bob Anderson, head of the NCHS mortality statistics branch, told me that this was “the first time we have done something like this before the data is final.” The hope is that researchers can use gross figures to estimate how many Americans died from COVID-19 during a certain period, and from there estimate how many Americans were infected. But choosing excess deaths in the first few weeks of the year will be difficult. Compared to the hundreds of thousands of deaths experienced by the country in an ordinary month, some COVID-19 deaths will hardly be a blip. Indeed, according to NCHS calculations, the United States did not exceed the expected number of deaths by a significant difference until the week of March 22.


image source

The benefactors made an ‘important difference’ in the coronavirus crisis | Instant News

The scientific battle against COVID-19 is accelerating thanks to charitable donations, wrote President Alice Gast in the Financial Times.

Philanthropic prizes can open many approaches, sometimes radical, when we race to understand coronavirus, he argued in the newspaper.

In a crisis, you need flexibility and lateral thinking. The benefactors offer this when every practicum time is important, “he said.

Like that The prize has helped Professor Robin Shattock when he developed the vaccine: “Professor Shattock spent days with valuable laboratory time applying, lobbying and persuading for funding to advance the vaccine. Fortunately, donors stepped in to bridge the funding gap before The British government contributed a further £ 22.5 million last month to take the vaccine through phase II trials. “

More than £ 4 million in philanthropic support help advance this work. “Even now, with this significant government investment, benefactors can make an important difference. If Prof. Shattock’s team can run parallel trials abroad, they will get results faster, receive faster approval from regulators and can expand manufacturing worldwide. “

Hundreds of supporters Imperial-COVID-19 Response Fund “Made it possible fast and rolling distribution of grants for high-potential research, including a low cost open source ventilator fund lab-free coronavirus test which produces about an hour. “

Community Jameel: global impact

Professor Gast highlights the contribution of global philanthropy Jameel Community which was established J-IDEA, Abdul Latif Jameel’s Institute for Disease and Emergency Analysis, led by Professor Neil Ferguson, one of the most influential epidemiologists in the world.

Professor Gast writes: “A few months ago, the night before us launched that Jameel Institute for Emergency Analysis and Disease (J-IDEA) at Imperial’s School of Public Health, leaders of other academic groups supported by Community Jameel, this one in Massachusetts – the Jameel Poverty Action Lab, J-PAL, at MIT – announced as the winner of the Nobel Prize in economics. That is an accurate acknowledgment of the impact J-PAL has had on poverty reduction for millions of people around the world. It is also an award that deserves Mohammed Jameel, a philanthropist who supports academic projects that might not have developed in other ways. “

A piece of full opinion can be read Financial Times today.

/ Public release. See fully here.


image source