#covid 19 and immunosuppressive medications

[inkintheinternet]

Humanity vs Bacteria and Viruses - We are Losing

By Arjuwan Lakkdawala 

Ink in the Internet 

Humans are on top of the food chain, but we are not apex predators, I used to be relieved at the thought that giant dinasaurs went extinct, because I can't imagine how humanity would have survived if those giants still walked the earth. So are we safe now. The answer is no.

Apparently the giants were never our predators, our species has been hunted for thousands of years by microscopic entities. It's the war on humans by Bacteria and Viruses.

We have some of them which are good for us, and many that are harmless in our environment and nature. But the so called "few" that cause mild to severe disease keep emerging.

When we are born and in the first years of our lives we aquire a number of good germs, which are a mixture of viruses, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, collectively they are called microbiota. 

They stay with us throughout our lives forming a symbiotic relationship with the health of our bodies. 

We have no need to worry from them as long as our immune system is healthy, however, if it is compromised and interacts with any of these germs in a way which is inappropriate then any of these can turn into a disease causing pathogen.

So if we take care of our immune system we'll be okay? Yes, but unfortunately immunosuppression can happen in many ways, due to internal or external factors.

Some examples are surgery, antibiotics, antiviral drugs, genetics, and infections, all can result in compromise of the immune system.

1. Antibiotics can kill the germs of the microbiota when administered to kill infection causing germs.

2. During surgery germs of the microbiota may get removed.

3. Genetics could have defects that cause immune system compromise.

4. Antiviral drugs have shown in laboratory culture tests to cause inhibition of the immune system.

5. Infections like HIV and many others can cause weakening of the immune system.

Our only true defense against germs is the health of our immune system, therefore compromise of it is a possibly life threatening condition.

What about medical and technological advancement, and the assistance of artificial intelligence. What about the many methods of sterilisation, after all this is the 21st century.

Why does it feel like we are still in the middle ages when it comes to the fight against bacteria and viruses? Why haven't we eliminated the "few" disease causing germs. Why did we have a 3 year pandemic? Covid-19 is still causing thousands of deaths.

It's an extremely complex story to simplify but let us take the Streptococcus Pyogene, the bacteria that causes Strep A as a case study. 

Descriptions of it's symptoms can be found far back in 4th century writings. The bacteria's name is derived from Greek words meaning 'A Chain.' 

Outbreaks of Scarlet Fever, one of the diseases that Strep A can cause occurred throughout Europe and North America during the 17th and 18th centuries.

Another setback for humans is that there are thousands of strains of bacteria. 

Scientists have identified 8,000 strains of bacteria with information about their genetics and metabolism. 

However, there are few molecular studies about the age of bacterial pathogens that affected humans before the start of medical bacteriology.

Genetic studies of human skeletons and mummies have found Tuberculosis and Plagues dating back 5,000 and 6,000 years.

So why haven't modern science been able to eliminate these pathogens? And can it be predicted which bacteria or strain will turn pathogenic? 

The answer is yes and no. 

Mutations and evolution have been studied in laboratories, but these models cannot replicate natural settings with the limitless interactions of these microorganisms with nature. 

Therefore scientists have always been several steps behind. Our intelligence is the only weapon we have to keep ourselves on top of the food chain, because if nature keeps outsmarting us at this pace, as far as bacteria and viruses go that is serious bad news for mankind.

So is nature bad for us? No. We have tilted the balance of nature, and are suffering it's consequences.

According to an article in Nature.com that cites various studies, Climate Change has made many diseases worse, bringing people and disease causing microorganisms closer together.

Everything we have learned has been by observing it in nature first. If we can ever get ahead of viruses and bacteria or find stronger antibiotics or other methods of treatment it will only be found in nature. So we need to protect naturel habitats of all species from destruction, and not just the species themselves. The ecology holds the secrets of behaviors of microorganisms.

Scientists of the world and media need to talk sense into people that have projects damaging nature, and there needs to be trust between the public and health officials. 

Unfortunately after the many conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 vaccines, much of the trust in the World Health Organisation was severely damaged in a section of the public. 

The rise in global stroke levels didn't help either as it cast suspicion on the vaccines which were known to cause blood clots in people susceptible to it.

In the Twitter WHO comments many tweets are there blaming vaccines for the recent surge in the deaths of children by iGAS, however in the UK 89.1% children under 12 were less likely to be vaccinated according to the UK Health Security Agency website.

Scientists are debating if lockdowns caused the children to not develope better immunity against the bacteria due to lack of exposure.

Matt Koci, virologist and immunologist warns in a NC State University article by Matt Shipman that humans are not apex predators and viruses and bacteria are around to show us whose boss. 

He explained how the genome of the 1918 virus that killed soldiers with pneumonia like symptoms was restored by extracting its RNA in the 1990s by Jeffrey K. Taubenbergen and a team from the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology to study it.

It was done in hope of learning how to deal with an outbreak of the pathogen should it happen.

We must stay vigilant in the fight against Bacteria and Viruses because we are precariously close to losing.

Many articles on the web suggest having a pet can boost children's immune system. Parents who choose to get a pet please keep in mind to teach your children to be kind to pets, and they are a lifelong responsibility and should not be discarded like toys. Adopt pets don't buy.

Foods that boost immune system should also be a priority and avoidance as much as possible of foods that weaken the immune system.

Arjuwan Lakkdawala is an author and independent journalist. Her Twitter is @Spellrainia

Copyright ©️ Arjuwan Lakkdawala 2022

Sources:

The Royal Society Publishing - Mark Achtman

Nature.com - Heidi Ledford

National Library of Medicine - W Heagy et al, J Clin Invest 1991 Jun

BMC Biology - Liise-anne Pirofski, Arturo Casadevall

PMC - Immunity and immunopathology to viruses: what decides the outcome?

Barry T. Rouse and Sharvan Sehrawat

Wikipedia- Pathogenic Bacteria

NIH - History of Streptococcal Research

Ferretti J, Köhler W.

Nature.com - McKenzie Prillaman

Wikipedia - Strain (Biology)

[wheelie-sick]

What is immunocompromisation?

Being immunocompromised means you have a weaker immune system than most people. There are two main ways people become immunocompromised

1. Medical Conditions

Certain medical conditions cause your immune system to be weaker. Some examples include:

Immunodeficiencies- A category of conditions causing a lower number of or lower efficacy of immune cells. This category is divided into two subcategories: primary immunodeficiency and secondary immunodeficiency. Primary immunodeficiency is a subcategory consisting of hundreds of different conditions all causing a lower number of immune cells. Secondary immunodeficiency is a smaller category consisting of conditions where a person lacks immune cells due to other causes such as malnutrition.

HIV/AIDS

Some cancers

2. Medications

There are two main types of medications that result in being immunocompromised: Immunosuppressants and chemotherapy

Immunosuppressive medications- Immunosuppressive medications are medications designed to suppress your immune response. These can work in many different ways with some targeting a broad range of immune cells and others being highly specific. These medications are often used for organ transplant recipients and people with moderate-severe autoimmune diseases. Some medications in this category include: organ transplant medications, biologics, and high dose corticosteroids

Chemotherapy- Chemotherapy often comes with the effect of preventing new fast-dividing cells from being produced. This is why hair loss is such a common side effect of chemotherapy. Immune cells are fast dividing and therefore frequently are unable to be produced while on chemotherapy

The effects of immunocompromisation

Immunocompromisation has a large range of effects depending on the reason someone is immunocompromised. The most common effects are an increased susceptibility to illness and cancers. Increased susceptibility to illness can look like:

Frequent illnesses

Illnesses that are more severe than they would be for other people

Recurrent infections

Infections that don't respond to medication

Delayed response to infection

Infections that last longer than usual

Some people are more susceptible to certain types of infections. For example anifrolumab, a biologic used for lupus, makes people more susceptible to herpes zoster and respiratory tract infections while prednisone, a corticosteroid, increases risk of infection across the board. This occurs due to different causes of immunocompromisation affecting different immune cells with different roles in preventing and responding to infection.

Grades of severity

Recently the term "moderately and severely immunocompromised" has been used in covid-19 resources. Certain factors are considered to make someone moderately or severely immunocompromised, these include:

Advanced or untreated HIV infection

Moderate or severe primary immunodeficiencies

Hematologic malignancies

Active treatment for solid tumors or hematologic malignancies

Immunosuppressant medications used for solid organ or islet transplants

CAR-T cell therapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Treatment with alkylating agents, antimetabolites, high-dose corticosteroids, chemotherapeutic agents, TNF blockers, and other biologic agents that are immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory

What immunocompromisation is not

It's worth noting that getting sick frequently or getting seriously sick from illnesses that are usually mild is a warning sign for being immunocompromised but does not inherently make you immunocompromised. Some people are just more susceptible to illness without being immunocompromised.

Having minimal response to an infection that is usually more serious is a sign of a strong immune system, not a weak one.

Being immunocompromised is also not the same as being high risk for serious infection. All immunocompromised people are high risk but not all high risk people are immunocompromised. Immunocompromisation is specifically when someone is high risk because their immune system is weak. Particularly in regards to covid, there are many conditions that make you higher risk that do not involve a weak immune system.

Autoimmune diseases do not automatically make you immunocompromised. Something being a disorder of the immune system does not mean that you are immunocompromised because immunocompromised means a weaker immune system not a malfunctioning immune system.

[mitchipedia]

Kaitlin Costello:

I’ve been masking consistently in public since 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic began, because I have a kidney transplant and will take immunosuppressant medication for the rest of my life. Unfortunately, my lifesaving medication also makes me more susceptible to infectious diseases like measles, the flu, and Covid-19. Even when people like me are vaccinated against the virus, we are at higher risk of being infected and are more likely to experience adverse health outcomes, including hospitalization and death. The legislation in Nassau County and elsewhere primarily targets people who wear masks to hide their identity while committing crimes or during public protests, specifically against the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Masks are defined as any facial covering that disguises the face, and facial coverings worn for religious or health reasons are exempt. But people like me, who wear masks for health reasons, are disproportionally affected by these bans even when they include medical exemptions. That’s because although the Nassau mask ban contains provisions for people who mask for medical reasons, it is up to the police to determine whether someone has a medical reason for masking if they are out in public. This means that enforcing the ban is subjective and will disproportionally impact Black people and people of color, who are more likely to be stopped by police and are also more likely to wear masks to prevent Covid. This is in part because Black and Latinx Americans are more cautious in their approach to the pandemic, reflecting the higher hospitalization and death rates in these communities. The Nassau mask ban as it is written is reminiscent of a “Stop and Frisk” law, which allows police to temporarily detain, question, and search people without a warrant. This isn’t just localized to Nassau County; mask bans have been proposed or passed in multiple states, including North Carolina, Ohio, and California.

[covid-safer-hotties]

COVID isolation continues four years later for some residents at higher risk - Published Aug 30, 2024

Sara Anne Willette has spent more than 1,620 days in isolation since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The New Jersey resident took health precautions in public before the pandemic because of her common variable immunodeficiency, which means she doesn't make enough antibodies to fight infections.

Simple tasks like going for a walk down the street or taking a trip to the grocery store are laden with safety hurdles and anxiety for Willette.

Stressful tasks, like moving from Iowa to New Jersey during the pandemic for her husband's new job, are now even more taxing. The two drove overnight to avoid crowds at gas stations and rest stops, and she's prepared to do it again. The substantial health precautions in her day-to-day life are forcing her and her family to pack up their life once more and look for a new home in the countryside.

"I'm angry that society is largely inaccessible and I have to risk my life for the bare minimum, like medical care," Willette told ABC News in a phone call. "Why live in civilization if all of it is completely inaccessible?"

More than four years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Willette is among the immunocompromised and disabled Americans who've complete changed their way of living to survive.

Her anger was tinged with disappointment as she talked about how the rest of the world has gone back to normal despite the hundreds of people across the country dying from COVID-19 each week amid a summer surge of the virus.

COVID-19 has also been a debilitating event for tens of millions of people who have or are currently experiencing long COVID, which in some cases has been defined as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. With some lawmakers beginning to propose mask bans in hopes of reducing crime, it's no longer an option for some to live life normally among the rest of society.

Willette was among the people ABC News checked back in with after previously talking to them about isolating two years after the pandemic began.

Finding a new normal There are simple joys that Willette misses: having a garden, running, walking, letting her dogs run without a leash and drinking coffee on a porch.

She's planning on moving to the mountains -- somewhere between New Hampshire and Virginia -- and gaining enough acreage to allow her and her family to embrace the activities they lost during the pandemic. However, being alone out in the countryside isn't the goal for Willette.

Rather, she intends to build a pathogen-aware community. That means buying enough land so other disabled, immunocompromised or health-conscious able-bodied people who don't want to get COVID-19 can join them and create a home of their own.

"We want something that feels like normal but is set up in a way that we decrease harm for everyone in the community," Willette said. "We can't do that in an urban area or even in a suburban area. There are too many risks."

Her mother and mother-in-law intend to move and join Willette, her husband and her son on the property as well.

For Charis Hill, a California resident who has a systemic inflammatory disease and takes immunosuppressive medications, it's been hard to access an in-person doctor's appointment since many safety precautions for COVID-19 are no longer being taken in medical care facilities.

As someone with "high-level medical needs," the lack of COVID precautions has even made seeking routine care a challenge.

"Just the fact that a medical environment that is supposed to know what a virus can do, most medical environments no longer require masking, and that's what makes it unsafe for people like me to go, for anybody to go," Hill told ABC over the phone.

"The impact of the delayed care, where people can't go get routine care, that's going to affect the whole health care system. Emergencies happen because of delayed care."

Despite the stress and forced isolation, they find moments of joy growing their own food in their garden, and stay busy by working to reduce the local feral cat population through Trap-Neuter-Return practices.

They break their isolation monthly to meet at a park with a close-knit circle of friends who take similar safety precautions -- they're all masked, socially distanced and have tested beforehand.

"That's really the only way for me to meet strangers and also to make new friends," Hill said.

Mask bans would further bar immunocompromised people from public life, according to Hill.

Such bans "make it unsafe for us to exist," Hill noted, because people may feel pressure not to wear masks when they're sick or if immunocompromised people are worried about backlash for doing so.

With more people testing positive for COVID this summer, and with the fall and winter virus season ahead, Hill says society's "new normal" should involve free testing, vaccines, access to at-home antiviral therapy paxlovid and flexible hybrid working options to mitigate the spread of illnesses.

"We need a new normal, and a new normal that is equitable for everyone, and that not only prioritizes high risk people, but that also reduces infection overall," Hill said.

COVID concerns for the immunocompromised population Immunocompromised people -- about 3% of the adult population in the U.S., according to the National Institutes of Health -- continue to face potentially serious medical complications or death when it comes to COVID-19. Even for those who were not previously at risk now have seen life-changing heath impacts.

"Long COVID can happen to anyone, and I have certainly seen young, healthy, vigorous athletes have prolonged, debilitating symptoms from long COVID," Dr. Jeannina Smith, the medical director of University of Wisconsin's Transplant Infectious Disease Program, told ABC over the phone.

However, society has largely appeared to have moved on. The CDC stopped recording some COVID-19 related data and some politicians have proposed mask bans as a potential solution to crime.

"It takes us a step back for public health," Hill said. "We have other pandemics that are coming, and it's going to make it harder to reenact mask mandates if we need them in the future."

For the immunocompromised, regular society could seem like a minefield, according to Dr. Cassandra M. Pierre, the medical director of Public Health Programs and the associate hospital epidemiologist at Boston Medical Center.

She noted that people at higher risk for complications "are still, unfortunately, in our hospitals today. We see that they have this forced risk of going on to develop critical COVID or potentially even die. This is still occurring. COVID is still happening."

This is all happening despite a better understanding of disease transmission and the information needed to be better equipped to empower communities to protect their health, Pierre added.

Patients have been harassed or mocked for wearing masks in public, Dr. Jeannina Smith noted, despite international and national medical organizations emphasizing the importance of mask wearing as a mitigation tactic for illnesses. Hill has experienced this first hand.

"You can't look at someone and know that they're receiving immunosuppression for an organ transplant or an autoimmune condition, and they remain at risk," Smith said.

"Even if you don't have individual risk, any person can still spread COVID to someone who has higher risk," she said. "In fact, much of the spread continues to be from asymptomatic person. The very idea that we would criminalize wanting to protect our fellow citizens is pretty horrific."

The federal government has recently changed its tune amid the summer COVID spike and is preparing for the upcoming fall and winter season by approving and granting emergency use authorization for updated COVID-19 vaccines and restarting its free at-home COVID tests program.

[colinwilson11]

Digitalization Will Propel The Bullous Pemphigoid Market Growth Owing To Increased Diagnosis Accuracy

The Bullous Pemphigoid Market involves treating a rare autoimmune disease wherein the immune system attacks the skin and mucous membranes resulting in large fluid-filled blisters and vesicles on the skin and mucosal membrane. Bullous Pemphigoid primarily affects the elderly population above the age of 60 and leads to extensive itching and pain. The main treatment modalities involve immunomodulatory medications such as corticosteroids, anti-inflammatory drugs, and immunosuppressive medications to ease symptoms.

The Bullous Pemphigoid Market is estimated to be valued at US$ 1.4 Bn in 2024 and is expected to exhibit a CAGR of 10% over the forecast period 2024-2031.

Key players operating in the Bullous Pemphigoid market are GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Roche. These companies offer a range of treatment options from oral and topical corticosteroids to immunosuppressive therapies. The increasing geriatric population prone to developing bullous pemphigoid coupled with rising awareness regarding the condition is expected to drive the growth of the market. Additionally, advancements in diagnosis facilitated by digital imaging technologies assist in prompt diagnosis and treatment of the condition, thereby improving treatment outcomes.

Key Takeaways

Key players analysis: Key players operating in the Bullous Pemphigoid market are GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Roche. GlaxoSmithKline leads the market with drugs including Rituximab and Benlysta.

Growing demand: The growing geriatric population accounted for a major share of the bullous pemphigoid patient pool. According to the WHO, the number of people aged 60 years and older is expected to double by 2050. This significantly drives the demand for bullous pemphigoid treatment.

Technological advancement: Advancements in digital imaging and teledermatology allow accurate diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid through visualization of skin lesions via smartphones and teleconsultation. This enables early intervention and superior management of the condition.

Market Trends

Combination therapies: There is a growing trend of using drug combinations as opposed to monotherapies to effectively manage bullous pemphigoid. Popular combinations involve corticosteroids with immunosuppressants.

Targeted biologic agents: Novel targeted biologic agents aimed at specific antibodies and immune pathways involved in bullous pemphigoid show promise. Drugs like Rituximab, Inebilizumab, and Eculizumab are being evaluated for efficacy and safety.

Market Opportunities

Emerging economies: Countries in Asia Pacific and Latin America present lucrative opportunities for bullous pemphigoid treatment providers owing to growing medical needs of their aging population and economic expansion.

Online consultations: Telehealth and e-pharmacy platforms allow people to remotely access bullous pemphigoid specialists and medication, thereby overcoming distance barriers. This increases access to care.

Impact Of COVID-19 On Bullous Pemphigoid Market Growth

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the growth of the bullous pemphigoid market. During the initial phases of the pandemic between 2020-21, the market witnessed a decline in growth rate owing to lockdowns imposed across various countries. This led to postponement of non-essential dermatological procedures and treatments. Patients also avoided visiting healthcare facilities fearing exposure to the virus. As a result, diagnosis and treatment rates for bullous pemphigoid reduced considerably during this period.

However, with lifting of lockdowns and rollout of vaccination drives globally, the market has started recovering post 2021. Increased awareness about the autoimmune disorder and availability of effective treatment options are supporting the growth trajectory. Various initiatives undertaken by key market players to ensure uninterrupted supply of drugs and therapies have also boosted market revenues. For instance, companies streamlined their production and distribution channels to meet the rising demand. Teleconsultations further aided continued care for patients during lockdowns.

Going forward, the bullous pemphigoid market is expected to witness robust expansion supported by ageing population prone to developing the condition. Moreover, rapid advancements in biologics and targeted therapies will expand treatment options. Players are investing heavily in R&D to develop novel pipeline drugs. Favorable regulatory environment and reimbursement policies will augment market access. Widespread vaccination drives and resumption of normal healthcare activities will further accelerate market growth in the coming years.

Europe holds the largest share of bullous pemphigoid market in terms of value owing to sizeable patient pool and high treatment uptake. North America follows Europe in terms of revenue generation led by rising disease prevalence and advanced healthcare infrastructure. Asia Pacific is recognized as the fastest growing regional market and will continue exhibiting strong growth momentum through 2031. This can be attributed to improving access to diagnosis and treatment options due to expanding healthcare expenditure in countries like China and India.

Geographical Regions With Highest Bullous Pemphigoid Market Value

North America accounts for the largest share of the Bullous Pemphigoid Market value-wise. The region is estimated to hold over 35% revenue share of the overall market in 2024 led by strong presence of leading pharmaceutical companies in US and Canada. Increased focus on research into novel treatment options along with supportive reimbursement policies are driving the growth of the North America bullous pemphigoid market.

Europe holds the second largest value share globally on account of rising burden of the autoimmune disorder due to aging population. Countries like Germany, UK, France, Italy are major revenue generators for Europe bullous pemphigoid market. High healthcare expenditure and availability of affordable treatments make Europe an attractive regional market.

Geographical Region Witnessing Fastest Growth In Bullous Pemphigoid Market

Asia Pacific region has emerged as the fastest growing geographical market for bullous pemphigoid globally. The Asia Pacific bullous pemphigoid market is projected to expand at a CAGR of over 12% during 2024-2031. Factors such as growing geriatric demographic, increasing medical awareness regarding bullous pemphigoid diagnosis and management, rising healthcare spending, and improving access to advanced drugs are fueling the market growth. Countries like India, China, Japan, and South Korea are expected to drive substantial revenues for bullous pemphigoid treatment manufacturers within Asia Pacific market.

Get more insights on this topic:  https://www.ukwebwire.com/bullous-pemphigoid-market-growth-to-be-fueled-by-advancements-in-targeted-therapies/

Author Bio:

Money Singh is a seasoned content writer with over four years of experience in the market research sector. Her expertise spans various industries, including food and beverages, biotechnology, chemical and materials, defense and aerospace, consumer goods, etc. (https://www.linkedin.com/in/money-singh-590844163 )

What Are The Key Data Covered In This Bullous Pemphigoid Market Report?

:- Market CAGR throughout the predicted period

:- Comprehensive information on the aspects that will drive the Bullous Pemphigoid Market's growth between 2024 and 2031.

:- Accurate calculation of the size of the Bullous Pemphigoid Market and its contribution to the market, with emphasis on the parent market

:- Realistic forecasts of future trends and changes in consumer behaviour

:- Bullous Pemphigoid Market Industry Growth in North America, APAC, Europe, South America, the Middle East, and Africa

:- A complete examination of the market's competitive landscape, as well as extensive information on vendors

:- Detailed examination of the factors that will impede the expansion of Bullous Pemphigoid Market vendors

FAQ’s

Q.1 What are the main factors influencing the Bullous Pemphigoid Market?

Q.2 Which companies are the major sources in this industry?

Q.3 What are the market’s opportunities, risks, and general structure?

Q.4 Which of the top Bullous Pemphigoid Market companies compare in terms of sales, revenue, and prices?

Q.5 Which businesses serve as the Bullous Pemphigoid Market’s distributors, traders, and dealers?

Q.6 How are market types and applications and deals, revenue, and value explored?

Q.7 What does a business area’s assessment of agreements, income, and value implicate?

*Note: 1. Source: Coherent Market Insights, Public sources, Desk research 2. We have leveraged AI tools to mine information and compile it

[trendingreportz]

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market - Forecast(2024 - 2030)

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Overview

The Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market size is estimated to reach $31.3 billion by 2028, growing at a CAGR of 3.7% during the forecast period 2023-2028. Treatment of multiple sclerosis may involve immunosuppressants, immunomodulators and monoclonal antibodies. Interferons are disease-modifying drugs that assist in decreasing relapses in people enduring multiple sclerosis. Intramuscular injections are utilized when additional kinds of delivery techniques like oral, intravenous and subcutaneous are not suggested. As per a novel clinical trial in August 2022, an experimental antibody therapy for multiple sclerosis can reduce symptom flare-ups by half, as compared to standard treatment. Interferon beta-1a has been certified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis and it has been assessed in clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19. According to the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, more than 2.8 million people are living with Multiple Sclerosis worldwide. The burgeoning focus of firms on pipeline products for multiple sclerosis is set to drive the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market. The recommended continuous medicines for multiple sclerosis-like interferons to decrease the requirement for hospitalization due to COVID-19 are set to propel the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry during the forecast period 2023-2028. This represents the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry Outlook.

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Report Coverage

The “Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Report - Forecast (2023-2028)” by IndustryARC, covers an in-depth analysis of the following segments in the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market.

By Drug Class: Immunomodulators, Immunosuppressants, Interferons and Others.

By Route Of Administration:Oral, Injection (Intramuscular, Subcutaneous and Intravenous).

By Geography: North America (the US, Canada and Mexico), Europe (Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Spain, Russia and the Rest of Europe), Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia & New Zealand and the Rest of Asia-Pacific), South America (Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia and the Rest of South America) and the Rest of the World (the Middle East and Africa).

Request Sample

Key Takeaways

Geographically, North America (Multiple Sclerosis Drugs market share) accounted for the highest revenue share in 2022. It is poised to dominate the market over the period 2023-2028 owing to the increasing predominance of multiple sclerosis involving immunomodulators in the North American region.

The growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market is being driven by considerable financing of large pharmaceutical firms in the drug development procedure and surging interferon treatment of Multiple Sclerosis. However, the soaring cost of medications is one of the major factors hampering the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market.

The Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Detailed Analysis of the Strengths, Weaknesses and Opportunities of the prominent players operating in the market would be provided in the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market report.

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Segment Analysis - by Drug Class

The Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market based on drug class can be further segmented into Immunomodulators, Immunosuppressants, Interferons and Others. The Immunomodulators Segment held the largest share of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs market in 2022. This growth is fueled by the surging application of immunomodulators for the treatment of multiple sclerosis and its connected symptoms. Interferon beta and glatiramer acetate (GA) were the earliest immunomodulators certified for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) and clinically isolated syndromes. The greater prescription rates are further propelling the growth of the Immunomodulators segment.

Furthermore, the Immunosuppressants segment is estimated to grow at the fastest CAGR of 4.3% during the forecast period 2023-2028 owing to the typical application of immunosuppressants like azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and mitoxantrone for the treatment of Multiple Sclerosis as well as application of immunosuppressants as combination therapy or monotherapy.

Inquiry Before Buying

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Segment Analysis - by Route Of Administration

The Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market based on the route of administration can be further segmented into Oral, Subcutaneous and Injection. The Injection Segment held the largest share of the multiple Sclerosis Drugs market in 2022. This growth is fueled by the surging count of approvals for multiple sclerosis medications as injections for subcutaneous application in the treatment of ailment. The injection segment is sub-segmented into intramuscular, subcutaneous and intravenous. The increasing application of intravenous (IV) infusions like OCREVUS to treat relapsing or primary progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis is further propelling the growth of this segment.

Furthermore, the Oral segment is estimated to grow at the fastest CAGR of 5.5% during the forecast period 2023-2028 due to the growing introduction of novel products, assistance in patient satisfaction, boosting therapeutic compliance and the soaring inclination toward oral medications.

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Segment Analysis - by Geography

North America (Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market) dominated the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs market with a 40% share of the overall market in 2022. The growth is driven by the existence of key players in the North American region. The approval by regulatory authorities is further propelling the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry, thereby contributing to the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry Outlook, in the North American region. Furthermore, the Asia-Pacific region is estimated to be the region with the fastest CAGR over the forecast period 2023-2028. This growth is fuelled by the factors like enhanced distribution networks of pharmaceutical firms in emerging economies in the Asia-Pacific region. The surging government initiatives are further fueling the progress of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market in the Asia-Pacific region.

Schedule a Call

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Drivers

Surging Approvals for Intramuscular Injections:

As per Healthline, current findings from the National MS Society estimate that almost 1 million people in the U.S. are living with Multiple Sclerosis. In February 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certified an intramuscular injection formulation of Plegridy (peginterferon beta-1a) to treat patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). This formulation, for injection directly into the muscle, is what is usually utilized to convey the flu shot. As per Biogen, Plegridy’s developer, treatment provided through intramuscular injection is as efficient as the subcutaneous injection formulation. This novel formulation was also currently certified by the European Commission. The surging approvals for intramuscular injections are therefore fueling the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market during the forecast period 2023-2028.

Soaring Treatment Involving Immunomodulators and Immunosuppressants:

As per Healthline, a supposed 2.5 million people live with Multiple Sclerosis globally. Medications certified for application in multiple sclerosis that decrease the frequency of intensifications or gradual infirmity advancement are termed disease-modifying drugs (DMDs). These DMDs can be further categorized as immunomodulators or immunosuppressants. Teriflunomide is an oral immunomodulator that causes anti-inflammatory impacts by restricting dihydroorotate dehydrogenase, a mitochondrial enzyme included in pyrimidine synthesis. It is designated for relapsing forms of MS. The most typically utilized immunosuppressants in Multiple Sclerosis are azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and mitoxantrone. The soaring treatment involving immunomodulators and immunosuppressants is fueling the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry, thereby contributing to the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry Outlook during the forecast period 2023-2028.

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Challenges

Side Effects of Interferons:

As per MS Discovery Forum, an approximated 200 novel cases are diagnosed every week in the U.S. Interferon beta (IFNbeta) decreases the relapse rate and activity as assessed by serial MRI scanning and ailment advancement of Multiple Sclerosis. Therapy with IFNbeta may be connected with numerous unfavorable reactions. Comparatively repeated side effects involve flu-like symptoms, transient laboratory abnormalities, menstrual ailments and raised spasticity. Dermal injection site reactions happen subsequent to subcutaneous application of IFNbeta-1b and IFNbeta-1a. Likely side effects of IFNbeta involve different autoimmune reactions, capillary leak syndrome, anaphylactic shock, thrombotic-thrombocytopenic purpura, insomnia, headache, alopecia and depression. These issues are thus hampering the growth of the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market.

Buy Now

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry Outlook

More focus on pipeline drugs for multiple sclerosis and emerging R&D financing in the pharmaceutical industry are key strategies adopted by players in the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market. The top 10 companies in the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs market are:

Bayer AG

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.

Novartis AG

Sanofi Inc.

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Celgene Corporation

Acorda Therapeutics, Inc.

Biogen, Inc.

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (Johnson & Johnson)

Merck Serono (Merger between EMD Serono and Merck KGaA)

Recent Developments

In October 2021, Novartis declared that it would introduce 41 abstracts at the upcoming 37th Congress of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS). The data being introduced covered an all-inclusive MS portfolio. This stressed the firm’s dedication in enhancing the quality of life for people residing with MS at all phases of the ailment.

In June 2021, Novartis marked a collaboration agreement and alternative to acquiring Cellerys. Cellerys is a Zurich-based startup, conducting research on a therapy to combat Multiple Sclerosis (MS). 

In January 2020, Novartis favorably finished the acquisition of The Medicines Company. This included a possibly first-in-class, investigational cholesterol-lowering therapy - inclisiran. The Medicines Company proposed the New Drug Application (NDA) for inclisiran to FDA in December 2019. 

[cmr-insights]

Transplant Drug Monitoring Assay Market Statistics and Global Analysis Report 2030

The Global Transplant Drug Monitoring Assay Market was valued at US$ 203.6 Million in 2022 and is anticipated to reach US$ 574.5 Million by the end of 2030 with a CAGR of 13.9% from 2023 to 2030

Make The Smart Decision. Download A Free Sample Of Our Report @ https://cognizancemarketresearch.com/request/transplant-drug-monitoring-assay-market/

Transplant diagnostics play a pivotal role in ensuring compatibility between organ donors and recipients, both before and after transplantation. With the expanding prevalence of conditions that can lead to organ failure, the use of transplant diagnostics is expected to grow significantly. Healthcare professionals are increasingly recognizing the advantages of these tests in assessing the suitability of organ transplant procedures.

The market for transplant medication monitoring assays is projected to reach a value of USD 529.1 million by 2030. The necessity for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in transplant medicine, regulating immunosuppressant drug concentrations within the therapeutic range, remains a driving factor. TDM ensures that drug levels are neither excessively high nor too low, reducing the risk of adverse effects such as toxicity or rejection. These factors are expected to drive the demand for transplant medication monitoring assays in the coming years.

Throughout the forecasted period, substantial growth is anticipated in the global transplant medication monitoring assay market. Key drivers include the increasing demand for organ transplants, higher research and development investments, and the rising incidence of chronic liver and kidney diseases.

Global Transplant Drug Monitoring Assay Market Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

The therapeutic drug monitoring market has experienced negative impacts due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Several factors have contributed to these challenges. Firstly, delays in the supply of reagents and testing kits, caused by disruptions in the wake of the pandemic, have resulted in reduced accuracy and capacity for therapeutic medication monitoring. Additionally, the pandemic has redirected healthcare resources away from addressing chronic conditions, including those requiring therapeutic drug monitoring, towards the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Furthermore, the availability of therapeutic drug monitoring services has been affected by the global decrease in organ transplantation activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reports, such as the one from the National Center for Biotechnology Information in 2022, indicate a significant decline in transplant procedures globally, estimated at 16%. This reduction in transplant surgeries has, in turn, impacted the demand for therapeutic medications, affecting market expansion during the pandemic.

However, the post-pandemic outlook suggests a potential resurgence in the therapeutic drug monitoring market. As more people will likely require organ transplants in the aftermath of the pandemic, the demand for therapeutic medications is expected to increase. This will be particularly important to monitor the body’s acceptance of new organs, as the risk of rejection becomes more significant. Consequently, while COVID-19 has posed challenges to the therapeutic drug monitoring market, the future holds potential for substantial growth as healthcare services adapt to evolving patient needs.

Increasing Prevalence of chronic diseases, geriatric population, and drug monitoring technologies to boost Transplant drug monitoring assay Market

The therapeutic drug monitoring market is seeing significant expansion, driven by several factors. One major contributor is the rise in chronic conditions such as cancer, neurological disorders, and heart problems. These ailments necessitate extended drug treatment within specific therapeutic parameters. In 2020, the World Health Organization recorded over 18 million new cancer cases, emphasizing the need for therapeutic drug monitoring services.

The market’s growth can also be attributed to increasing awareness of therapeutic drug monitoring’s significance, particularly in developing nations where autoimmune diseases are on the rise. Precision medicine, technological advances in drug monitoring, and government initiatives to enhance healthcare also contribute to the market’s expansion. With rising personal incomes and healthcare expenses in developing countries, the future presents numerous opportunities for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Additionally, the global aging population is a significant driver of market growth. The WHO predicts that the number of elderly individuals worldwide will reach 1.5 billion by 2050. Older adults are more prone to heart and kidney issues, leading to greater demand for organ transplants. Healthcare systems are adapting to this aging demographic, making considerable strides in the healthcare sector.

The equipment and consumables market for the global transplant medication monitoring assay industry is also experiencing substantial growth. The equipment sector held a significant share of the global market in 2022, and this trend is expected to continue. The importance of advanced equipment and technology in therapeutic drug monitoring underlines its potential in the market.

North America to spearhead the Transplant Drug Monitoring Assay Market

Increase in the prevalence of autoimmune diseases, growing awareness of therapeutic medication monitoring, rising demand for precision medicine, technological advancements in drug monitoring technologies, and government initiatives to enhance healthcare. Additionally, the market is expected to experience significant growth due to increased personal disposable income and healthcare expenditures in emerging nations. Well-funded organizations are contributing to financial awareness and investments in healthcare. In North America, investments in healthcare infrastructure and research and development, driven by the increasing occurrence of chronic diseases, are fostering innovation in treatments like transplant drug monitoring assays. Moreover, a favorable regulatory environment simplifies the development and marketing of these assays, while good infrastructure remains crucial for effective treatment.

Make The Smart Decision. Download A Free Sample Of Our Report @ https://cognizancemarketresearch.com/request/transplant-drug-monitoring-assay-market/

Companies operating in the transplant drug monitoring assay market have employed various growth strategies to enhance market share and revenue. Prominent companies in this sector include Immucor Transplant Diagnostics Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., GenDx, CareDx, Affymetrix Inc., Linkage Biosciences, Becton Dickinson and Company, Bio-Rad Inc., Illumina Inc., Abbott Laboratories Inc., bioMérieux S.A., QIAGEN NV, and Omixon Ltd.

[lupine-publishers-ctgh]

Lupine Publishers | The Risk of Hospitalization due to COVID-19 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Abstract

Objectives: The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 became a worldwide pandemic in 2020. It is known that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at an increased risk of infection, particularly when on immunosuppressive therapy. The outcomes of COVID-19 in IBD patients remain somewhat unclear.

Methods: This Finnish retrospective observational cohort study enrolled 74 patients with an established IBD diagnosis and a confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patient data (age, sex, body mass index, IBD type, biochemical and clinical activity, comorbidities [Charlson comorbidity index [CCI]) and symptoms of COVID-19 were compared with hospitalization due to the COVID-19 infection.

Results: We found that older age (p < 0.01) and comorbidities (CCI score higher than one [p < 0.01]) were associated with hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection. In contrast, none of the studied pharmacological treatments for IBD, IBD type or disease activity were associated with a higher risk of hospitalization.

Conclusion: Our study shows that comorbidities and older age are associated with hospitalization due to COVID-19. On the other hand, different pharmacological treatments for IBD were not linked to a higher risk of hospitalization.

Keywords:Inflammatory bowel diseases; Crohn’s disease; Ulcerative Colitis; COVID-19; Immunosuppressive Treatment

Introduction

The coronavirus pandemic is a worldwide health crisis brought on by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV 2), which causes a COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) infection [1]. The disease has continued to spread globally and was classified as a pandemic on 11 March 2020, by the World Health Organization [2]. Clinical symptoms in COVID-19 vary between patients, but most individuals have a mild form of the disease with no or flu-like symptoms, including a dry cough, fever, runny nose and fatigue. Additional symptoms may comprise shivering, throat pain, anosmia, headache, joint pain, nausea and diarrhoea [3,4]. In more severe forms of the disease, marked inflammation and progressive pneumonia occur, leading to difficulties in breathing. A COVID-19 infection has often proved to be more severe in patients over 60 years of age. Furthermore, most patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization or intensive care unit (ICU) admission have been shown to have at least one comorbidity, such as chronic lung or heart disease, diabetes or conditions that affect their immune system [5]. In addition, smokers have been suggested to develop more severe symptoms of COVID-19 and are more likely to be admitted to intensive care, to need mechanical ventilation or to die than to non-smokers [6].

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), frequently includes immunosuppressant medications [7-10]. The immunomodulators commonly used in IBD are corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, calcineurin inhibitors, anti-tumour necrosis factor agents or other biologicals. Their modes of action differ from each other, but they all compromise, to some extent, the patient’s immune response [11]. This may increase the patient’s risk of viral and bacterial infections and adverse outcomes of COVID-19 [12,13]. However, published data on possible associations of immunosuppressive therapy with severe COVID-19 remain inconsistent. Data extracted from the international registry Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SECURE-IBD; 1,439 cases, 112 with severe COVID-19) suggest an increased risk with thiopurines either combined with biologicals or as a monotherapy [14], whereas data from the French national health system (268,185 IBD patients, 600 hospitalizations) indicate no such association [15]. So far, there is no clear evidence for an increased risk of more severe outcomes in patients with IBD in the context of COVID-19. This study aimed to describe how COVID-19 presents and evolves in patients with IBD and to identify potential risk factors that may predict the severity and outcomes of a COVID-19 infection in IBD patients.

Methods

This was a retrospective, observational cohort study. All eligible patients were adults (18 years and older) with an established diagnosis of CD or UC and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, which was defined as the PCR-confirmed presence of the SARS-CoV-2 genome in a nasopharyngeal swab. The Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa is the largest hospital district in Finland, covering a population of more than 1.7 million. The IBD registry is an integrated platform of the hospital patient data system and comprises 5,194 secondary or tertiary care patients with an IBD diagnosis, treated mostly with immunosuppressants and biologicals. We identified IBD patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis by performing a search combining the hospital district’s COVID-19 registry and the IBD registry. The more detailed patient and disease data were collected retrospectively from the patient electronic charts in April 2021. For all eligible patients, we collected the following data: age, sex, ethnicity, pregnancy, body mass index, IBD type, IBD duration, surgical IBD treatment, pharmacological IBD treatment, other comorbidities (expressed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI] [16] signs and symptoms of COVID-19 (fever, cough, dyspnoea, dysosmia/dysgeusia, pharyngitis, diarrhoea, arthralgia-myalgia/ asthenia, rhinitis, dysphonia, headache, abdominal pain, nausea/ vomiting, thrombosis), antibiotic and anticoagulant therapies for COVID-19, COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization on a regular ward and in an ICU as well as death), and smoking status.

Data on faecal calprotectin (FC) as a surrogate marker of inflammation were recorded 0–6 months before the COVID-19 infection, during the COVID-19 infection and after the COVID-19 infection. Values considered to be normal for FC were < 200 μg/g [17,18]. The last registration on clinical activity of IBD was assessed based on patient charts. Clinical disease activity was determined according to the presence or absence of symptoms due to IBD (number of bowel movements, presence or absence of abdominal pain and presence of blood on defecation). The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) is a validated and easily applicable method of estimating the disease severity and the risk of death from a comorbid disease. It has also been shown that a higher mean CCI score is significantly associated with mortality and disease severity in COVID-19 patients [19].

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using the R software environment (version R-3.6.2). Differences in the hospitalization status and the studied variables were tested for significance using logistic regression, where the age and BMI of the patients served as confounding factors. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The values are presented as numeric with percentage or as mean with SD.

Ethical considerations

Permission to conduct the study was received from the institutional review board of Helsinki University Hospital. As this was a retrospective, non-interventional patient records review study, no ethics committee approval was required.

Results

Study population

Between 29 January 2020 and 15 April 2021, 74 patients with IBD (CD n = 32 [43%], UC n = 42 [57%]) had been diagnosed with a COVID-19 infection. The patients’ baseline characteristics are shown in (Table 1). Within the six months prior to the COVID-19 infection, 18% (n = 13) of the CD patients and 18% (n = 13) of UC patients had an active IBD. Based on the available data, 22% (n = 7) of the CD and 24% (n = 10) of the UC patients had a biochemically active disease, whereas 28% (n = 9) of the CD and 19% (n = 8) of the UC patients had a clinically active disease. Six percent (n = 2) of the CD patients and 19% (n = 8) of the UC patients were not on any pharmacological treatment for IBD at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. At the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, three patients (4%) were on systemic corticosteroid and thiopurine combination therapy; of these, only one UC patient was hospitalized on a regular ward and did not require ICU admission. We identified only one patient who was on concomitant medication with systemic corticosteroids, thiopurine and biologicals, and this patient was not hospitalized. Seven CD patients (22%) and eight UC patients (19%) were treated with thiopurine and biologicals, of these, one patient with CD and one with UC were hospitalized on a regular ward. Overall, two patients were pregnant, and neither of them was hospitalized. Nearly threequarters (72%, n = 23) of the CD patients and two-thirds (60%, n = 25) of the UC patients had no significant comorbidities (CCI 0). One comorbidity was present in 22% (n = 7) of the CD patients and in 19% (n = 8) of the UC patients. Hence, only 15% of all patients had two or more comorbidities. Seven patients (9%) had asthma, while none had been diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. For 36 patients, an FC value determined 0–6 months prior to the COVID-19 infection was available: the average value for CD patients was 279 μg/g and for UC patients 421 μg/g (FC range in all patients 5–1,600 μg/g, SD 482 μg/g). During the study period, 13 (18%) patients were hospitalized, four (5%) were admitted to an intensive care unit, and one patient died (Table 2). Except for the patient who eventually died, no-one needed mechanical ventilation. Among all hospitalized patients, the average number of days spent on a regular ward due to COVID-19 was 3.7 for CD, 6.3 for UC and 5.7 for all patients. Most patients (n = 62, 84%) were not on antibiotic therapy at the time of the COVID-19 infection. After the COVID-19 diagnosis had been established, 43% (n = 32) of all patients and 100% of those hospitalized received thrombosis prophylaxis.

COVID-19 symptoms

The most common COVID-19 symptoms, presented in Table 2, were cough (56%), rhino-pharyngitis (51%), fever (46%), headache (34%), dyspnoea (26%), diarrhoea (24%), arthralgia/myalgia (16%), dysosmia/dysgeusia (15%), flu-like symptoms (13%), abdominal pain (12%) and nausea/vomiting (9%). Five percent did not develop any symptoms due to the COVID-19 infection. No thromboembolic complications were diagnosed.

Factors predicting hospitalization

In all statistical analyses age, body mass index (BMI) and sex were examined simultaneously with the variable, and each variable was also examined alone. Increasing age was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization (p < 0.01), presented in (Figure 1A). With a CCI of two or more, the risk of hospitalization was significantly increased (p < 0.01 vs CCI 0–1), as seen in (Figure 1B). When the points for age were omitted from the CCI score, patients who had points due to an underlying medical condition were still more likely to be hospitalized (p < 0.01 vs no underlying medical condition).

Factors not predicting hospitalization

We could not demonstrate any significant association between BMI and risk of hospitalization, although there was a trend towards such a risk (p = 0.09). Interestingly, there was a significant association between BMI and hospitalization when one patient with a BMI of 54 was removed as an outlier (p = 0.02) (Figure 1C). Neither sex nor IBD type (UC or CD) had a significant impact on COVID-19 outcomes. There was no significant difference in hospitalizations among patients on biological medication, thiopurines or systemic corticosteroids, nor among patients who were taking any of the said medications as a combined therapy.

Discussion

Our study, which aimed at identifying risk factors for COVID-19 in IBD patients confirms previous findings indicating an association between hospitalization and both comorbidities and older age. Importantly, the use of any medication as maintenance therapy for IBD was not associated with an increased risk of a more severe COVID-19 infection or an undesirable outcome. The data of SECURE-IBD are likely to drive treatment recommendations for IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Immunosuppressive medications, especially thiopurines, used to treat IBD may result in a degree of immunosuppression, which has been hypothesized to lead to a more severe COVID-19 infection. Most of the patients in the IBD registry were on immunosuppressive treatment and were therefore thought to be at a higher risk of a severe COVID-19 infection. A recently published review article by Al-Ani and colleagues encourages the continuing of usual maintenance medications and highlights the importance of avoiding corticosteroids [20]. The finding of our study are in line with previous studies. In the case of an IBD flare-up, the risks and benefits of the treatments should be carefully discussed with the patient. More severe COVID-19 has been associated with older age and obesity [21-24]. Moreover, earlier studies have shown male sex to be a risk factor for more severe COVID-19 [25,26]. In the present study no significant association between sex and a higher risk of hospitalization was found. In the context of obesity, it is believed that the excess amount of adipose tissue causes inflammation and an impairment in the immune response. However, no significant correlation between BMI and the risk of hospitalization was found in our study. On the other hand, we found a significant association between age and hospitalization. It has been previously reported in studies of the general population that patients with comorbidities have a higher risk of more severe COVID-19 symptoms [27,28]. This was also seen in our population of IBD patients. Brenner and colleagues have found that increased age, comorbidities and, contrary to our study, also systemic corticosteroids are associated with severe COVID-19 in IBD patients [29].

Between 29 January 2020, when the first COVID-19 case in Finland was confirmed, and 15 April 2021, a total of 48,438 cases had been reported in the Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa, which constitutes 2.8% of the population of 1.7 million [30]. In the present study, we identified 74 (1.4%) out of 5,194 patients in the IBD registry with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis since the beginning of the pandemic. The proportion of IBD patients with confirmed COVID-19 is less than half of the corresponding proportion of the general population of the same geographical area. Earlier studies have indicated that patients with IBD are at risk of serious opportunistic infections, particularly when they are treated with immunosuppressive medication. However, the findings of our study suggest that patients with IBD are not at a higher risk of contracting the SARS-COV-2 than the general population. This could be partly explained by a more rigorous hygiene routine. The patients in the Uusimaa Region have received detailed hygiene and health instructions from the specialized IBD nurses since the beginning of the pandemic. In the future, more data are needed on the social impact that the pandemic may have had on these immunocompromised patients. This study has some limitations. Firstly, the number of patients was limited as the incidence of COVID-19 in Finland has remained relatively low. Secondly, the lack of data in the patient records made it challenging to find variables associated with an unfavorable outcome and a higher risk of hospitalization. Additionally, during the pandemic, patients have tended not to attend scheduled laboratory follow-up tests, resulting in missing data. Despite these limitations, we believe that this study reflects well the real-life situation in clinical practice and provides important data on the COVID-19 infection in the IBD population.

The present study also has several strengths. Firstly, as the COVID-19 registry of the hospital district covers all reported cases in the region, it is extremely unlikely that a COVID-19-positive patient included in the IBD registry would have been missed in our search. Secondly, this study was performed in a country with a high IBD prevalence of one percent of the population [31] and with, consistent IBD treatment patterns and active patient organization counselling in place. All patients have equal access to treatment, and most hospital districts have specialized nurses who are trained to treat patients with IBD and advise them on travelling, vaccinations and hygiene. The observation period of this study mainly took place before the national vaccinations against COVID-19 started. Although no vaccine data is available for this study population, the number of COVID-19-vaccinated patients can be neglected, as IBD patients on immunosuppressive therapy were among the groups to receive the vaccine, starting from mid-April 2021. Some of the newest COVID-19 strains that have emerged after the data collection for this study have been found to be more infectious and linked to a higher mortality rate. Future studies will show whether the outcome of COVID-19 will differ from today’s studies.

Conclusion

This is the first report on the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with IBD in Finland, a country with a high prevalence of IBD and low prevalence of COVID-19. We found that comorbidities and older age were associated with a negative COVID-19 outcome such as hospitalization. On the other hand, immunosuppressive treatment for IBD was not associated with the risk of hospitalization or death. The lower incidence of COVID-19 infections among IBD patients in comparison to the general population may be explained by the rigorous hygiene measures undertaken particularly by patients on immunosuppressive therapy.

Author Contributions

Statement of authorship: study design (MK, PM, Ca B, PA), statistical analysis (JJ, JA), initial manuscript drafting (MK), critical revision and final approval (all authors).

Funding

The authors received no specific grant for this research. Patient involvement and patient consent for publication. Patients were not involved in the design, conduct reporting or dissemination plans of this research. Patient consent was not required.

For more Lupine Publishers open access journals please visit our website: https://lupinepublishers.com/index.php

For more  Current Trends in Gastroenterology and Hepatology  articles please click here: https://lupinepublishers.com/gastroenterology-hepatology-journal/index.php

[the-rachana]

Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market – Empowering Progress in Fighting Lymphoproliferative Disorders: The Future of Treatment

Newark, New Castle, USA: The “Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market” provides a value chain analysis of revenue for the anticipated period from 2023 to 2031. The report will include a full and comprehensive analysis of the business operations of all market leaders in this industry, as well as their in-depth market research, historical market development, and information about their market competitors.

This latest report researches the industry structure, sales, revenue, price and gross margin. Major producers’ production locations, market shares, industry ranking and profiles are presented. The primary and secondary research is done in order to access up-to-date government regulations, market information and industry data. Data were collected from the Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment manufacturers, distributors, end users, industry associations, governments’ industry bureaus, industry publications, industry experts, third party database, and our in-house databases.

Get a Free Sample PDF of the Report – https://www.growthplusreports.com/inquiry/request-sample/lymphoproliferative-disorder-treatment-market/8996

Key Players in the Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market: –

Novartis Pharmaceuticals

Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Pfizer Inc.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company Limited

Merck & Co.

Celgene Corporation

AstraZeneca

Genentech, Inc.

AbbVie Inc.

Kite Pharma Inc.

Spectrum Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Sanofi AG

Amgen Inc

Market Segmentation:

GLOBAL LYMPHOPROLIFERATIVE DISORDER TREATMENT MARKET – ANALYSIS & FORECAST, BY TYPE

Medications (Immunosuppressants, Corticosteroids, Etc.)

Chemotherapy

Bone Marrow Transplant

Immunoglobulin

Others

Market segment by Region/Country including: –

-North America (United States, Canada and Mexico) -Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia and Spain etc.) -Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia and Southeast Asia etc.) -South America (Brazil, Argentina and Colombia etc.) -Middle East and Africa (South Africa, UAE and Saudi Arabia etc.)

This report also includes a discussion of the major players across each regional Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment market. Further, it explains the major drivers and regional dynamics of the global Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment market and current trends within the industry.

Request for customization in Report: https://www.growthplusreports.com/inquiry/customization/lymphoproliferative-disorder-treatment-market/8996

Key Benefits for Industry Participants and Stakeholders One can find in-depth research data and industry trends of the Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market Research. The report offers details on potential investment opportunities, including those that are local and sector-specific that may benefit stakeholders and members of the industry. One can gain a thorough grasp of market dynamics by looking at prices as well as the activities of producers and consumers. With the use of market research, which will assist in discovering and visualizing new market participants as well as their portfolios, will be better able to make decisions and create an efficient counter strategy to maximize market advantage.

COVID 19 Impact Analysis

The Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market Research Reports include a thorough discussion of the coronavirus’s effects in addition to the major market trends. When considering the impact of the COVID-19 on the industry, insights, analysis, projections, and predictions are given in the report study.

Given the breadth of the pandemic’s disruption, it is evident that the current depression is fundamentally different from previous recessions. Due to the sudden drop in demand and growing unemployment, the business climate will alter. In this uncomfortable environment, businesses may carve new roads by embracing novel ideas like ”advance toward localization, cash conservation, supply chain resilience, and innovation.”

Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment Market TOC: https://www.growthplusreports.com/report/toc/lymphoproliferative-disorder-treatment-market/8996

the market share and rank (in volume and value), competitor ecosystem, new product development, expansion, and acquisition.

This report stays updated with novel technology integration, features, and the latest developments in the market

This report helps stakeholders to understand the COVID-19 and Russia-Ukraine War Influence on the Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment industry.

This report helps stakeholders to gain insights into which regions to target globally

This report helps stakeholders to gain insights into the end-user perception concerning the adoption of Lymphoproliferative Disorder Treatment .

This report helps stakeholders to identify some of the key players in the market and understand their valuable contribution.

QUICK BUY: https://www.growthplusreports.com/checkout-8996

Browse Latest Healthcare Reports:

Lacrimal Devices Market

Laryngoscopes Market

Multifocal Motor Neuropathy Market

Dental Bone Void Fillers Market

Polymyalgia Rheumatica Market

Metal Bone Plates Market

Ulcerative Colitis Market

Livestock Diagnostics Market

Medical Tricorder Market

Contact Us:

Manan Sethi Director, Market Insights Email: sales@growthplusreports.com Phone no: +1 888 550 5009 Web: https://www.growthplusreports.com/

About Us Growth Plus Reports is part of GRG Health, a global healthcare knowledge service company. We are proud members of EPhMRA (European Pharmaceutical Marketing Research Association). Growth Plus portfolio of services draws on our core capabilities of secondary & primary research, market modelling & forecasting, benchmarking, analysis and strategy formulation to help clients create scalable, ground-breaking solutions that prepare them for future growth and success. We were awarded by the prestigious CEO Magazine as “Most Innovative Healthcare Market Research Company in 2020.”

[vaccinelaw]

If you or a loved one has suffered Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP) or other blood disorders caused by MMR,. call us today to receive a consultation. Individuals diagnosed with ITP following an MMR immunization may be entitled to financial compensation for their medical bills, loss of income, pain, and suffering, and other losses. Symptoms of ITP can include easy or excessive bruising, bleeding gums, nose bleeds, blood in the stool or urine, and unusually-heavy menstrual flow. There is evidence to suggest that ITP may also result from COVID-19 vaccination. Treatment options for ITP include corticosteroids, immunosuppressant medications, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), platelet transfusions, and thrombopoietin receptor agonist medications. Individuals who have been diagnosed with ITP after an MMR vaccine may be able to receive financial compensation through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) or by filing a claim in state court. To learn more about consultation with vaccine law.

See More: https://vaccinelaw.com/lawyer/-Idiopathic-Thrombocytopenic-Purpura-(ITP)-Vaccine-Injury-Attorney_cp20495.htm

[nileshcarrerhospital3]

    When to get admitted in the hospital if you are Covid-positive?

The virus is deadly and is spreading too soon! With precautions being taken, there are still people who are falling sick. The Covid-19 Virus starts of mildly and within no time, amplifies!

Once tested positive, doctors suggest home-isolation. However, the question that prevails is when to get admitted in the hospital? The answer to this depends on the symptoms. To begin with, you must know what the early warning signs of this deadly virus are and how they must be dealt with. Staying at home is indeed imperative. Social distancing is unavoidable. Remember to cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue or carefully cough into your elbow. Also, sanitize and wash your hands regularly.

But, what is important is that how can you tell if that cough or sneeze is something to worry about?

The symptoms of corona virus are many-a-time similar to that of a normal cold or a viral. However, you must be aware of the warning signs and when you must call your doctor.

The most common symptoms of Covid:

The most common symptoms include cold and cough and a shortness of breath. Some might face difficulty in breathing. In many people, the cold and cough begins dry and then evolves into a series of sneezes and coughs that hampers breathing. Some people might also face more symptoms which include:

·        Fever

·        Chills

·        Repeated shaking with chills

·        Muscle pain

·        Headache

·        Sore throat

·        New loss of taste or smell

People facing any of these or a combination of these symptoms must seek medical assistance. The doctors are most likely to suggest a treatment at home.

Those with underlying health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, immunosuppression, cancer, lung disease or kidney disease are more at risk for complications from the virus. Adults over the age of 60 are also at higher risk.

When to get admitted?

People with pre-Covid health issues are at a greater risk. Also, even when in isolation at home and under treatment, the symptoms might advance at getting admitted into the hospital is then a must.

Look out for the following to know when to get admitted into the hospital:

·        Difficulty breathing

·        A persistent pain or pressure in your chest

·        Bluish lips or face

·        High fever

·        Unconsciousness

However, it is best advised to seek medical care even if you feel ill or unusual. The virus is affecting different people in a different way. If you have any health issues prior to being Corona-positive, it is best advised to be under constant medical supervision. People above the age of 45 must take extra precautions and must not think twice before getting admitted in the hospital. If symptoms worsen and the condition deteriorates before getting admitted into the hospital, it would be very challenging for medical experts to regain your good health.

Seek immediate medical assistance if you feel your condition is deteriorating. Our doctors at CIMS are fully equipped and trained to provide expert health care to Covid patients. We have in-house CT-Scan and Path Lab to ensure our patients get all facilities under one roof. CIMS is the best Covid-centre in Bhopal, providing expert health care 24/7. 

best oncology hospital in bhopal

[covid-safer-hotties]

Mask bans disenfranchise millions of Americans with disabilities - Published Aug 20, 2024

Last week, a mask ban in Nassau County, New York was signed into law. If I lived just 60 miles east of my New Jersey town, I would be under threat of a fine or jail time every time I left the house.

I’ve been masking consistently in public since 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic began, because I have a kidney transplant and will take immunosuppressant medication for the rest of my life. Unfortunately, my lifesaving medication also makes me more susceptible to infectious diseases like measles, the flu, and Covid-19. Even when people like me are vaccinated against the virus, we are at higher risk of being infected and are more likely to experience adverse health outcomes, including hospitalization and death.

The legislation in Nassau County and elsewhere primarily targets people who wear masks to hide their identity while committing crimes or during public protests, specifically against the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Masks are defined as any facial covering that disguises the face, and facial coverings worn for religious or health reasons are exempt. But people like me, who wear masks for health reasons, are disproportionally affected by these bans even when they include medical exemptions.

That’s because although the Nassau mask ban contains provisions for people who mask for medical reasons, it is up to the police to determine whether someone has a medical reason for masking if they are out in public. This means that enforcing the ban is subjective and will disproportionally impact Black people and people of color, who are more likely to be stopped by police and are also more likely to wear masks to prevent Covid. This is in part because Black and Latinx Americans are more cautious in their approach to the pandemic, reflecting the higher hospitalization and death rates in these communities. The Nassau mask ban as it is written is reminiscent of a “Stop and Frisk” law, which allows police to temporarily detain, question, and search people without a warrant.

This isn’t just localized to Nassau County; mask bans have been proposed or passed in multiple states, including North Carolina, Ohio, and California. For example, in North Carolina, where I lived for six years while completing my doctorate, a state-wide ban was recently passed. Although the final bill also includes a health exemption, it originally prohibited masking even for medical reasons. This medical exemption was only added after strong pushback from disability advocates.

There is also a statewide mask ban under consideration in New York state, where many people in my immediate family live. The bill as it is currently written bans masks not just during protests but also for people engaging in lawful assembly, or a peaceful gathering of more than two people for a lawful purpose, in the state. I’m not an expert on the New York state legislature, so I don’t know how likely it is to pass. But if it does, it means that my parents and I would be violating the law if we did something as banal as go on a walk together outdoors while wearing masks, because the bill allows people to wear masks for medical reasons only during a declared public health emergency. (The federal Covid public health emergency was declared over in 2023.) Again, enforcement of these bans is up to the police, who are not medical experts and who will apply the law unevenly. The right of peaceful assembly is part of the First Amendment, and mask bans are an infringement on everyone’s rights.

That is doubly true for disabled people participating in peaceful protest. Without protests, we would not have the Americans with Disabilities Act. A series of demonstrations beginning at San Francisco in 1977 and concluding in 1990 at the Capitol building’s “Capitol Crawl” helped codify disability rights into law in the United States. At the Capitol Crawl demonstration, 60 people with disabilities, many of them wheelchair users, crawled up the Capitol steps to illustrate structural barriers and to show that disability rights are a civil rights issue. Disabled people have relied on protesting to get our basic needs met. Mask bans don’t just take away our right to protest; they take away our right to peacefully exist in public. They are an infringement on everyone’s rights and are a threat to American democracy.

There is another reason for banning masks: the strong push for people to “return to normal” during the “post-pandemic” era. Masking is a reminder that the pandemic is still ongoing. In the same week that Nassau County passed its mask ban, weekly test positivity in the United States was the highest it has been since February 2022 and continues to climb. The CDC and other public health agencies encourage people to wear masks when respiratory viruses are causing high numbers of infection and illness in the community, especially in congregate or crowded settings. It’s a good idea for everyone to be wearing a mask right now when they are out in public.

People who are immunocompromised are told to wear masks in addition to getting vaccinated, improving air ventilation, and making sure our close contacts also receive the vaccine. But current coverage with the Covid-19 vaccines is low; only 22.3% of adults have received a vaccine dose in the past year. This means that I can’t return to your unmasked “normal.” The new normal includes exposure to a virulent, airborne illness that circulates year-round, with seasonal spikes that correspond to times of high travel and congregate indoor activities.

If masks are banned where I live, I will have to make the choice between endangering my transplant and my health every time I leave the house, or to remain on permanent lockdown in my home. As disability oracle and activist Alice Wong reminds us, mask bans are an extension of “ugly laws,” historical laws and ordinances that prevented disabled people from being in public. We deserve to be seen and to be included in public life. Mask bans are a threat not just to disabled people, but to all of us. It’s never too late to start masking again—to protect not just your health and the health of people around you, but also to protect our fundamental human rights.

[pandemic-info]

The ImmunoCARE Study

Rapid, Accurate COVID Testing to Reduce Hospitalization of Immunocompromised Individuals

Info via tweet from one of the researchers:

Eligible participants will receive 10 @CueHealth tests per month as well as access to Cue's on-demand telehealth and prescription delivery services at no cost.

These tests are much more sensitive than antigen tests.

Info from the website:

About the Study

The risks associated with COVID-19 infection are higher for immunocompromised individuals than the general public. ImmunoCARE is an innovative research project to study whether repeated at-home tests, on-demand telemedicine, and quick delivery of medication for those who test positive for COVID-19 can reduce COVID-19 severity in immunocompromised people.

ImmunoCARE is a joint research project from Scripps Research – a renowned biomedical research organization — and Cue Health, a leading health care technology company that develops portable diagnostic tests for at-home use.

Who Can Enroll

ImmunoCARE is available to individuals who are moderately to severely immunocompromised. Participants will provide documentation from a medical provider confirming their diagnosis.

Additional inclusion criteria includes:

Living in the United States

18 years or older

Vaccinated against COVID-19

Willing and able to participate in study interventions including:

Use of a compatible smartphone, including camera and bluetooth

Willing and able to share health insurance claims data from Medicaid, Medicare, or an Anthem plan

Completing Surveys

Use of Cue Health App and tests

Use of MyDataHelps by Web or App

Immunocompromised, including

Symptomatic HIV

Graft versus host disease

Immunoglobulin deficiency/Immunodeficiency

Immunosuppressive therapy

Leukemia

Lymphoma (Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin)

Metastatic Cancer

Multiple Myeloma

Solid organ malignancy

Transplant, hematopoietic stem cell

Transplant, solid organ

What We Will Ask You to Do

ImmunoCARE will enroll 10,000 participants. Half of participants will test for COVID-19 and seek care as they normally would; the other half will receive at-home COVID-19 tests from Cue Health for themselves and others in their household. All participants will be asked to complete monthly surveys about COVID-19 exposure, infection, and hospitalization.

Our Thanks to You

As our thanks for your participation, all eligible participants will receive a series of Amazon gift cards as compensation for time throughout the study.

[cmr-insights]

Prostate Cancer Therapeutics Market Statistics and Global Analysis Report 2030

The Global Prostate Cancer Therapeutics Market was valued at US$ 12,798.4 Million in 2022 and is anticipated to reach US$ 23,231.4 Million by the end of 2030 with a CAGR of 7.8% from 2023 to 2030.

Make The Smart Decision. Download A Free Sample Of Our Report @ https://cognizancemarketresearch.com/request/prostate-cancer-therapeutics-market/

The reliance of patients on health insurance coverage for payments can create pressure on market participants. However, the past decade has witnessed substantial advancements in prostate cancer treatment through medications like enzalutamide, abiraterone acetate, sipuleucel-T, and cabazitaxel, as well as options like radium-233. These treatments have not only improved patient trust due to fewer side effects but have also driven the shift toward patient-centered care.

Market participants can consider cost reduction strategies by shifting production to underdeveloped regions in the Asia-Pacific, potentially lowering the expenses associated with prostate cancer treatment. Positive projections are being made for the global prostate cancer treatment market. The past decade has seen significant progress in androgen receptor targeting for prostate cancer. However, optimal utilization of immunotherapy and radiopharmaceutical-based treatments in clinical settings remains a challenge. Despite this, governmental and private investments in research and development initiatives are expected to drive the global market.

The prevalence of prostate cancer is tied to an aging population and sedentary lifestyles, particularly in industrialized nations. Prostate Cancer Foundation data indicates that most prostate cancer cases occur in men over 65. Factors such as sedentary behaviors, rising childhood obesity, and the aging demographic contribute to the global prevalence of prostate cancer, creating a higher demand for effective treatments.

Modern diagnostic methods, particularly monitoring PSA levels, have revolutionized prostate cancer diagnosis. Ongoing clinical trials are exploring new cytotoxic drugs, hormonal therapies, and anti-prostate-specific membrane antigen therapies in phases II and III. Personalized immune responses through the combination of hormone therapy and anti-CTLA therapy are also being investigated for treating prostate cancer.

Prostate Cancer Therapeutics Market Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

The rapid onset of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted cancer detection and treatment, leading to the suspension of diagnostic and surgical procedures. Moreover, research has indicated that individuals with cancer, particularly those with prostate cancer, are more susceptible to COVID-19 due to their immunosuppressed state from the cancer itself and associated treatments. As a precaution, they were strongly advised to avoid non-essential diagnostic or treatment procedures and to stay home. The Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) reported a substantial decrease in cancer diagnosis rates in the United States in May 2020 because of the pandemic. This decline in cancer diagnoses is expected to translate into a temporary reduction in demand during this period.

However, with the gradual relaxation of stringent regulations, there is an anticipation that diagnostic clinics and research efforts related to prostate cancer will resume. This resumption is projected to contribute to the expansion of the market in the post-pandemic period. As healthcare services and facilities adapt to the new normal and implement safety measures, there is an expectation that the momentum will pick up again in terms of cancer detection, treatment, and related research activities.

Increasing Prevalence of Prostate Cancer, along with the Geriatric Population and new product development to Boost Prostate Cancer Therapeutics Market

The growth of the market under study is primarily driven by two key factors: an aging population and a high frequency of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer ranks as the second most prevalent form of cancer among men. It has been identified in 1,414,259 cases globally, accounting for 7.3% of all cancer cases. The prevalence of prostate cancer is notably higher in older individuals, aligning with the increasing global aging population. According to the World Population Prospects 2022 report by the United Nations, the proportion of people aged 65 or older is projected to rise from 10% in 2022 to 16% in 2050. This demographic shift is expected to amplify the expansion of the market due to the greater vulnerability of the elderly to prostate cancer.

Furthermore, the market’s growth trajectory is anticipated to be further buoyed by escalating product approvals and advancements. A noteworthy example occurred in March 2022, when the US Food and Drug Administration approved Novartis’ Pluvicto (lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan) for treating adult patients afflicted by prostate-specific membrane antigen-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer – a specific subtype of advanced cancer. This approval is poised to contribute to the market’s expansion by increasing the usage of prostate cancer medications.

In tandem with pharmaceutical breakthroughs, the rising number of product launches will play a pivotal role in expanding the research segment. A notable instance of this trend took place in May, with the introduction of a pioneering prostate MRI-to-ultrasound registration tool. This innovative tool facilitates MRI-to-ultrasound registration using both trans-rectal ultrasound imagery and conventional MRI scans. The adoption of advanced technologies like this, driven by the growing utilization of transrectal ultrasound diagnostics for detecting prostate cancer, is poised to further fuel the growth of the market.

North America to spearhead the Prostate Cancer Therapeutics market

In 2022, North America commanded approximately 50% of the global prostate cancer treatment market share, a position expected to persist throughout the forecast period. This dominance can be attributed to several factors, including heightened utilization of prostate cancer treatment products, widespread dispersion of prostate cancer pharmaceuticals, the robust presence of pharmaceutical enterprises, and a well-established healthcare infrastructure. Notably, North America’s growth trajectory is underpinned by the emergence of promising novel medications within the biologics and hormone therapy sectors. The imminent introduction of pipeline drugs is projected to exert a substantial influence on the regional market during the envisaged period.

Within North America, both public and private institutions are making significant investments in healthcare infrastructure and research and development. This strategic focus aims to address the mounting incidence of prostate cancer patients, resulting in the heightened usage of diverse treatment products.

The regulatory environment in North America is experiencing positive transformations. Regulatory agencies are streamlining their policies and procedures, facilitating a more straightforward launch process for new drugs. This supportive climate empowers pharmaceutical enterprises to bring novel therapies to market more efficiently.

The American Cancer Society’s 2022 projections anticipate an influx of over 1.9 million new cancer cases within the country. Importantly, the cancer susceptibility notably escalates with advancing age, a trend corroborated by the same source. Concurrently, the population is witnessing an increase in individuals grappling with chronic illnesses, further underscoring the significance of the geriatric demographic.

Make The Smart Decision. Download A Free Sample Of Our Report @ https://cognizancemarketresearch.com/request/prostate-cancer-therapeutics-market/

The global Prostate Cancer Therapeutics market is driven by prominent players such as Sanofi, Astellas Pharma US, Inc., Myovant Sciences Ltd., Ipsen Pharma, AbbVie Inc., Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc., BG Bayer, AstraZeneca, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals Inc., Ferring B.V, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Dendreon Pharmaceuticals LLC, Pfizer Inc., Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Novartis AG, and Genentech, Inc. These companies have strategically embraced various growth strategies to not only expand their market share but also enhance their revenue streams.

[longhaulerbear]

Extensive reports of pulmonary embolisms, ischaemic stroke and myocardial infarctions caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as a significantly increased long-term risk of cardiovascular diseases in COVID-19 survivors, have highlighted severe deficiencies in our understanding of thromboinflammation and the need for new therapeutic options. Due to the complexity of the immunothrombosis pathophysiology, the efficacy of treatment with conventional anti-thrombotic medication is questioned. Thrombolytics do appear efficacious, but are hindered by severe bleeding risks, limiting their use. Nanomedicine can have profound impact in this context, protecting delicate (bio)pharmaceuticals from degradation en route and enabling delivery in a targeted and on demand manner. We provide an overview of the most promising nanocarrier systems and design strategies that may be adapted to develop nanomedicine for COVID-19-induced thromboinflammation, including dual-therapeutic approaches with antiviral and immunosuppressants. Resultant targeted and side-effect-free treatment may aid greatly in the fight against the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

[mi6-rogue]

Durability and determinants of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies following the second and third doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine

Preliminary report; Background Epidemiological data regarding differences in durability and its determinants of humoral immunity following 2- and 3-dose COVID-19 vaccination are scarce. Methods We repeatedly assessed the anti-spike IgG antibody titers of 2- and 3-dose mRNA vaccine recipients among the staff of a medical and research center in Tokyo. Linear mixed models were used to estimate trajectories of antibody titers from 14 to 180 days after the last immune-conferred event (vaccination or infection) and compare antibody waning rates across prior infection and vaccination status, and across background factors in infection-naive participants. Results A total of 6901 measurements from 2964 participants (median age, 35 years; 30% male) were analyzed. Antibody waning rate (per 30 days [95% CI]) was slower after 3-dose (25% [23 - 26]) than 2-dose (36% [35 - 37]). Participants with hybrid immunity (vaccination and infection) had further slower waning rates: 2-dose plus infection (16% [9 - 22]); 3-dose plus infection (21% [17 - 25]). Older age, male sex, obesity, coexisting diseases, immunosuppressant use, smoking, and alcohol drinking were associated with lower antibody titers, whereas these associations disappeared after 3-dose, except for sex (lower in female participants) and immunosuppressant use. Antibody waning was faster in older participants, females, and alcohol drinkers after 2-dose, whereas it did not differ after 3-dose across except sex. Conclusions The 3-dose mRNA vaccine conferred higher durable antibody titers, and previous infection further enhanced its durability. The antibody levels at a given time point and waning speed after 2-dose differed across background factors; however, these differences mostly diminished after 3-dose. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.07.22282054v1?rss=1%22&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=tumblr Read more ↓