Mmwr Recommendations and Reports最新文献

{"title":"Tularemia Antimicrobial Treatment and Prophylaxis: CDC Recommendations for Naturally Acquired Infections and Bioterrorism Response - United States, 2025.","authors":"Christina A Nelson, Dana Meaney-Delman, Shannon Fleck-Derderian, Jessica Winberg, Paul S Mead","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7402a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7402a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This report provides CDC recommendations to U.S. health care providers and preparedness personnel regarding treatment and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) of tularemia, an uncommon but potentially serious disease caused by the gram-negative coccobacillus, Francisella tularensis. Tularemia occurs naturally in the United States and other Northern Hemisphere regions. Because F. tularensis has a low infectious inoculum, it is classified as a potential bioterrorism agent that could infect thousands of persons if intentionally released, requiring rapid, informed decision-making by public health agencies, first responders, and clinicians. To mitigate the effects of a bioterrorism attack, the U.S. government stockpiles medical countermeasures, and the 21st Century Cures Act mandates development of evidence-based guidelines for their use. Since 2001 when guidelines for tularemia treatment and PEP were last published, new animal study data and human clinical data have become available. CDC compiled a broad evidence base by conducting a series of systematic reviews of the literature on human tularemia through 2023, analyzing U.S. surveillance data, gathering outbreak reports and case series, and collecting animal data. During a series of scientific forums, evidence was presented from these investigations and additional data sources to subject matter experts, and individual expert input on proposed recommendations was solicited. The guidelines team then assessed the available evidence, considered different perspectives and feedback shared in the expert forums, and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation summary of findings and the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate recommendations based on the balance of benefits and harms. Notable changes include use of a treatment and prophylaxis framework; designation of fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin) and doxycycline as first-line treatment options for outbreaks of any size; identification of third-tier treatment options when first-line and alternative antimicrobials are unavailable or contraindicated for certain patients; and recommendations for neonates, breastfeeding infants, lactating mothers, patients with immunocompromise, and geriatric patients. These guidelines provide a summary of best practices for treatment and prophylaxis of human tularemia for both naturally occurring disease and after a bioterrorism attack. They do not include information on dispensing medical countermeasures, diagnostic testing, triage decisions, or adjunct treatments for patients with tularemia. Health care providers can use these guidelines to manage patients with naturally occurring infection and, with public health officials, prepare their organizations, clinics, hospitals, and communities to respond to a tularemia mass exposure event.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"74 2","pages":"1-33"},"PeriodicalIF":60.1,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12499366/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145201488","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Antiretroviral Postexposure Prophylaxis After Sexual, Injection Drug Use, or Other Nonoccupational Exposure to HIV - CDC Recommendations, United States, 2025.","authors":"Mary R Tanner, Jesse G O'Shea, Katrina M Byrd, Marie Johnston, Gema G Dumitru, John N Le, Allison Lale, Kathy K Byrd, Preetam Cholli, Emiko Kamitani, Weiming Zhu, Karen W Hoover, Athena P Kourtis","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7401a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7401a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) for HIV is recommended when a nonoccupational (e.g., sexual, needle, or other) exposure to nonintact skin or mucous membranes that presents a substantial risk for HIV transmission has occurred, and the source has HIV without sustained viral suppression or their viral suppression information is not known. A rapid HIV test (also referred to as point-of-care) or laboratory-based antigen/antibody combination HIV test is recommended before nPEP initiation. Health care professionals should ensure the first dose of nPEP is provided as soon as possible, and ideally within 24 hours, but no later than 72 hours after exposure. The initial nPEP dose should not be delayed due to pending results of any laboratory-based testing, and the recommended length of nPEP course is 28 days. The recommendations in these guidelines update the 2016 nPEP guidelines (CDC. Updated guidelines for antiretroviral postexposure prophylaxis after sexual, injection drug use, or other nonoccupational exposure to HIV - United States, 2016. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; 2017). These 2025 nPEP guidelines update recommendations and considerations for use of HIV nPEP in the United States to include newer antiretroviral (ARV) agents, updated nPEP indication considerations, and emerging nPEP implementation strategies. The guidelines also include considerations for testing and nPEP regimens for persons exposed who have received long-acting injectable ARVs in the past. Lastly, testing recommendations for persons who experienced sexual assault were updated to align with the most recent CDC sexually transmitted infection treatment guidelines. These guidelines are divided into two sections: Recommendations and CDC Guidance. The preferred regimens for most adults and adolescents are now bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide or dolutegravir plus (tenofovir alafenamide or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) plus (emtricitabine or lamivudine). However, the regimen can be tailored to the clinical circumstances. Medical follow-up for persons prescribed nPEP also should be tailored to the clinical situation; recommended follow-up includes a visit at 24 hours (remote or in person) with a medical provider, and clinical follow-up 4-6 weeks and 12 weeks after exposure for laboratory testing. Persons initiating nPEP should be informed that pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV (PrEP) can reduce their risk for acquiring HIV if they will have repeat or continuing exposure to HIV after the end of the nPEP course. Health care professionals should offer PrEP options to persons with ongoing indications for PrEP and create an nPEP-to-PrEP transition plan for persons who accept PrEP.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"74 1","pages":"1-56"},"PeriodicalIF":60.1,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12064164/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144016171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CDC Program Evaluation Framework, 2024.","authors":"Daniel P Kidder, Leslie A Fierro, Elena Luna, Heather Salvaggio, Amanda McWhorter, Shelly-Ann Bowen, Rebecca Murphy-Hoefer, Sally Thigpen, Dayna Alexander, Theresa L Armstead, Euna August, Destiny Bruce, Seseni Nu Clarke, Cassandra Davis, Amia Downes, Sarah Gill, L Duane House, Michael Kerzner, Karen Kun, Karen Mumford, Leah Robin, Dara Schlueter, Michael Schooley, Eduardo Valverde, Linda Vo, Donjanea Williams, Kai Young","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7306a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7306a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Program evaluation is a critical tool for understanding and improving organizational activities and systems. This report updates the 1999 CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health (CDC. Framework for program evaluation in public health. MMWR Recomm Rep 1999;48[No. RR-11];1-40) by integrating major advancements in the fields of evaluation and public health, lessons learned from practical applications of the original framework, and current Federal agency policies and practices. A practical, nonprescriptive tool, the updated 2024 framework is designed to summarize and organize essential elements of program evaluation, and can be applied at any level from individual programs to broader systems by novices and experts for planning and implementing an evaluation. Although many of the key aspects from the 1999 framework remain, certain key differences exist. For example, this updated framework also includes six steps that describe the general process of evaluation planning and implementation, but some content and step names have changed (e.g., the first step has been renamed Assess context). The standards for high-quality evaluation remain central to the framework, although they have been updated to the five Federal evaluation standards. The most substantial change from the 1999 framework is the addition of three cross-cutting actions that are core tenets to incorporate within each evaluation step: engage collaboratively, advance equity, and learn from and use insights. The 2024 framework provides a guide for designing and conducting evaluation across many topics within and outside of public health that anyone involved in program evaluation efforts can use alone or in conjunction with other evaluation approaches, tools, or methods to build evidence, understand programs, and refine evidence-based decision-making to improve all program outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 6","pages":"1-37"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11444645/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142332048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2024-25 Influenza Season.","authors":"Lisa A Grohskopf, Jill M Ferdinands, Lenee H Blanton, Karen R Broder, Jamie Loehr","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7305a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7305a1","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This report updates the 2023-24 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;72[No. RR-2]:1-24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV3s), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), and trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV3) are expected to be available. All persons should receive an age-appropriate influenza vaccine (i.e., one approved for their age), with the exception that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens may receive either high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) or adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) as acceptable options (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3). Except for vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed and recommended vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: trivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), or trivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used.Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: the composition of 2024-25 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and updated recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients. First, following a period of no confirmed detections of wild-type influenza B/Yamagata lineage viruses in global surveillance since March 2020, 2024-25 U.S. influenza vaccines will not include an influenza B/Yamagata component. All influenza vaccines available in the United States during the 2024-25 season will be trivalent vaccines containing hemagglutinin derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Thailand/8/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Massachusetts/18/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); and 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus. Second, recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients have been updated to include HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 as acceptable options for solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3).This","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 5","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11501009/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142086385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024.","authors":"Kathryn M Curtis, Antoinette T Nguyen, Naomi K Tepper, Lauren B Zapata, Emily M Snyder, Kendra Hatfield-Timajchy, Katherine Kortsmit, Megan A Cohen, Maura K Whiteman","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7303a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7303a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The 2024 U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use (U.S. SPR) addresses a selected group of common, yet sometimes complex, issues regarding initiation and use of specific contraceptive methods. These recommendations for health care providers were updated by CDC after review of the scientific evidence and a meeting with national experts in Atlanta, Georgia, during January 25-27, 2023. The information in this report replaces the 2016 U.S. SPR (CDC. U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2016. MMWR 2016;65[No. RR-4]:1-66). Notable updates include 1) updated recommendations for provision of medications for intrauterine device placement, 2) updated recommendations for bleeding irregularities during implant use, 3) new recommendations for testosterone use and risk for pregnancy, and 4) new recommendations for self-administration of injectable contraception. The recommendations in this report are intended to serve as a source of evidence-based clinical practice guidance for health care providers. The goals of these recommendations are to remove unnecessary medical barriers to accessing and using contraception and to support the provision of person-centered contraceptive counseling and services in a noncoercive manner. Health care providers should always consider the individual clinical circumstances of each person seeking contraceptive services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice for individual patients; when needed, patients should seek advice from their health care providers about contraceptive use.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 3","pages":"1-77"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340200/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141898939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.","authors":"Antoinette T Nguyen, Kathryn M Curtis, Naomi K Tepper, Katherine Kortsmit, Anna W Brittain, Emily M Snyder, Megan A Cohen, Lauren B Zapata, Maura K Whiteman","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7304a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7304a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The 2024 U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (U.S. MEC) comprises recommendations for the use of specific contraceptive methods by persons who have certain characteristics or medical conditions. These recommendations for health care providers were updated by CDC after review of the scientific evidence and a meeting with national experts in Atlanta, Georgia, during January 25-27, 2023. The information in this report replaces the 2016 U.S. MEC (CDC. U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2016. MMWR 2016:65[No. RR-3]:1-103). Notable updates include 1) the addition of recommendations for persons with chronic kidney disease; 2) revisions to the recommendations for persons with certain characteristics or medical conditions (i.e., breastfeeding, postpartum, postabortion, obesity, surgery, deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism with or without anticoagulant therapy, thrombophilia, superficial venous thrombosis, valvular heart disease, peripartum cardiomyopathy, systemic lupus erythematosus, high risk for HIV infection, cirrhosis, liver tumor, sickle cell disease, solid organ transplantation, and drug interactions with antiretrovirals used for prevention or treatment of HIV infection); and 3) inclusion of new contraceptive methods, including new doses or formulations of combined oral contraceptives, contraceptive patches, vaginal rings, progestin-only pills, levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, and vaginal pH modulator. The recommendations in this report are intended to serve as a source of evidence-based clinical practice guidance for health care providers. The goals of these recommendations are to remove unnecessary medical barriers to accessing and using contraception and to support the provision of person-centered contraceptive counseling and services in a noncoercive manner. Health care providers should always consider the individual clinical circumstances of each person seeking contraceptive services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice for individual patients; when needed, patients should seek advice from their health care providers about contraceptive use.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 4","pages":"1-126"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11315372/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141898940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CDC Clinical Guidelines on the Use of Doxycycline Postexposure Prophylaxis for Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infection Prevention, United States, 2024.","authors":"Laura H Bachmann, Lindley A Barbee, Philip Chan, Hilary Reno, Kimberly A Workowski, Karen Hoover, Jonathan Mermin, Leandro Mena","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7302a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7302a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>No vaccines and few chemoprophylaxis options exist for the prevention of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) (specifically syphilis, chlamydia, and gonorrhea). These infections have increased in the United States and disproportionately affect gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TGW). In three large randomized controlled trials, 200 mg of doxycycline taken within 72 hours after sex has been shown to reduce syphilis and chlamydia infections by >70% and gonococcal infections by approximately 50%. This report outlines CDC's recommendation for the use of doxycycline postexposure prophylaxis (doxy PEP), a novel, ongoing, patient-managed biomedical STI prevention strategy for a selected population. CDC recommends that MSM and TGW who have had a bacterial STI (specifically syphilis, chlamydia, or gonorrhea) diagnosed in the past 12 months should receive counseling that doxy PEP can be used as postexposure prophylaxis to prevent these infections. Following shared decision-making with their provider, CDC recommends that providers offer persons in this group a prescription for doxy PEP to be self-administered within 72 hours after having oral, vaginal, or anal sex. The recommended dose of doxy PEP is 200 mg and should not exceed a maximum dose of 200 mg every 24 hours.Doxy PEP, when offered, should be implemented in the context of a comprehensive sexual health approach, including risk reduction counseling, STI screening and treatment, recommended vaccination and linkage to HIV PrEP, HIV care, or other services as appropriate. Persons who are prescribed doxy PEP should undergo bacterial STI testing at anatomic sites of exposure at baseline and every 3-6 months thereafter. Ongoing need for doxy PEP should be assessed every 3-6 months as well. HIV screening should be performed for HIV-negative MSM and TGW according to current recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 2","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11166373/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141249098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CDC Laboratory Recommendations for Syphilis Testing, United States, 2024.","authors":"John R Papp, Ina U Park, Yetunde Fakile, Lara Pereira, Allan Pillay, Gail A Bolan","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7301a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7301a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This report provides new CDC recommendations for tests that can support a diagnosis of syphilis, including serologic testing and methods for the identification of the causative agent Treponema pallidum. These comprehensive recommendations are the first published by CDC on laboratory testing for syphilis, which has traditionally been based on serologic algorithms to detect a humoral immune response to T. pallidum. These tests can be divided into nontreponemal and treponemal tests depending on whether they detect antibodies that are broadly reactive to lipoidal antigens shared by both host and T. pallidum or antibodies specific to T. pallidum, respectively. Both types of tests must be used in conjunction to help distinguish between an untreated infection or a past infection that has been successfully treated. Newer serologic tests allow for laboratory automation but must be used in an algorithm, which also can involve older manual serologic tests. Direct detection of T. pallidum continues to evolve from microscopic examination of material from lesions for visualization of T. pallidum to molecular detection of the organism. Limited point-of-care tests for syphilis are available in the United States; increased availability of point-of-care tests that are sensitive and specific could facilitate expansion of screening programs and reduce the time from test result to treatment. These recommendations are intended for use by clinical laboratory directors, laboratory staff, clinicians, and disease control personnel who must choose among the multiple available testing methods, establish standard operating procedures for collecting and processing specimens, interpret test results for laboratory reporting, and counsel and treat patients. Future revisions to these recommendations will be based on new research or technologic advancements for syphilis clinical laboratory science.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"73 1","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10849099/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CDC Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Anthrax, 2023.","authors":"William A Bower, Yon Yu, Marissa K Person, Corinne M Parker, Jordan L Kennedy, David Sue, Elisabeth M Hesse, Rachel Cook, John Bradley, Jürgen B Bulitta, Adolf W Karchmer, Robert M Ward, Shana Godfred Cato, Kevin Chatham Stephens, Katherine A Hendricks","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7206a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7206a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>This report updates previous cdc guidelines and recommendations on preferred prevention and treatment regimens regarding naturally occurring anthrax. also provided are a wide range of alternative regimens to first-line antimicrobial drugs for use if patients have contraindications or intolerances or after a wide-area aerosol release of: </strong>Bacillus anthracis spores if resources become limited or a multidrug-resistant B. anthracis strain is used (Hendricks KA, Wright ME, Shadomy SV, et al.; Workgroup on Anthrax Clinical Guidelines. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expert panel meetings on prevention and treatment of anthrax in adults. Emerg Infect Dis 2014;20:e130687; Meaney-Delman D, Rasmussen SA, Beigi RH, et al. Prophylaxis and treatment of anthrax in pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:885-900; Bradley JS, Peacock G, Krug SE, et al. Pediatric anthrax clinical management. Pediatrics 2014;133:e1411-36). Specifically, this report updates antimicrobial drug and antitoxin use for both postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and treatment from these previous guidelines best practices and is based on systematic reviews of the literature regarding 1) in vitro antimicrobial drug activity against B. anthracis; 2) in vivo antimicrobial drug efficacy for PEP and treatment; 3) in vivo and human antitoxin efficacy for PEP, treatment, or both; and 4) human survival after antimicrobial drug PEP and treatment of localized anthrax, systemic anthrax, and anthrax meningitis.</p><p><strong>Changes from previous cdc guidelines and recommendations include an expanded list of alternative antimicrobial drugs to use when first-line antimicrobial drugs are contraindicated or not tolerated or after a bioterrorism event when first-line antimicrobial drugs are depleted or ineffective against a genetically engineered resistant: </strong>B. anthracis strain. In addition, these updated guidelines include new recommendations regarding special considerations for the diagnosis and treatment of anthrax meningitis, including comorbid, social, and clinical predictors of anthrax meningitis. The previously published CDC guidelines and recommendations described potentially beneficial critical care measures and clinical assessment tools and procedures for persons with anthrax, which have not changed and are not addressed in this update. In addition, no changes were made to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for use of anthrax vaccine (Bower WA, Schiffer J, Atmar RL, et al. Use of anthrax vaccine in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, 2019. MMWR Recomm Rep 2019;68[No. RR-4]:1-14). The updated guidelines in this report can be used by health care providers to prevent and treat anthrax and guide emergency preparedness officials and planners as they develop and update plans for a wide-area aerosol release of B. anthracis.</p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"72 6","pages":"1-47"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10651316/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"107592773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Tick-Borne Encephalitis Vaccine: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2023.","authors":"Susan L Hills, Katherine A Poehling, Wilbur H Chen, J Erin Staples","doi":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7205a1","DOIUrl":"10.15585/mmwr.rr7205a1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Tick-borne encephalitis (tbe) virus is focally endemic in parts of europe and asia. the virus is primarily transmitted to humans by the bites of infected: </strong>Ixodes species ticks but can also be acquired less frequently by alimentary transmission. Other rare modes of transmission include through breastfeeding, blood transfusion, solid organ transplantation, and slaughtering of viremic animals. TBE virus can cause acute neurologic disease, which usually results in hospitalization, often permanent neurologic or cognitive sequelae, and sometimes death. TBE virus infection is a risk for certain travelers and for laboratory workers who work with the virus. In August 2021, the Food and Drug Administration approved Ticovac TBE vaccine for use among persons aged ≥1 year. This report summarizes the epidemiology of and risks for infection with TBE virus, provides information on the immunogenicity and safety of TBE vaccine, and summarizes the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for use of TBE vaccine among U.S. travelers and laboratory workers.</p><p><strong>The risk for tbe for most u.s. travelers to areas where the disease is endemic is very low. the risk for exposure to infected ticks is highest for persons who are in areas where tbe is endemic during the main tbe virus transmission season of april–november and who are planning to engage in recreational activities in woodland habitats or who might be occupationally exposed. all persons who travel to areas where tbe is endemic should be advised to take precautions to avoid tick bites and to avoid the consumption of unpasteurized dairy products because alimentary transmission of tbe virus can occur. tbe vaccine can further reduce infection risk and might be indicated for certain persons who are at higher risk for tbe. the key factors in the risk-benefit assessment for vaccination are likelihood of exposure to ticks based on activities and itinerary (e.g., location, rurality, season, and duration of travel or residence). other risk-benefit considerations should include 1) the rare occurrence of tbe but its potentially high morbidity and mortality, 2) the higher risk for severe disease among certain persons (e.g., older persons aged ≥60 years), 3) the availability of an effective vaccine, 4) the possibility but low probability of serious adverse events after vaccination, 5) the likelihood of future travel to areas where tbe is endemic, and 6) personal perception and tolerance of risk: </strong></p><p><strong>Acip recommends tbe vaccine for u.s. persons who are moving or traveling to an area where the disease is endemic and will have extensive exposure to ticks based on their planned outdoor activities and itinerary. extensive exposure can be considered based on the duration of travel and frequency of exposure and might include shorter-term (e.g., <1>adddd<p></p>","PeriodicalId":51328,"journal":{"name":"Mmwr Recommendations and Reports","volume":"72 5","pages":"1-29"},"PeriodicalIF":33.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10651317/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72016116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}