Error in authors' information (Sebastien Poulin, 13 February 2013)
Anik St-Denis is from Department of Microbiology and Immunology and Centre de recherche du CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,
not from
Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
read full comment
Comment on: Poulin et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 13:24
Response to Susan van den Hof (Assel Terlikbayeva, 24 January 2013)
1) We worked with data supplied to us from the Kazakh National TB Control Program and the National Institute of Geography. We did not generate the data ourselves, and we cannot attest to the accuracy of how it was collected and how accurate it is. As was pointed out in your comment the "actual coverage and reporting of results has not been and still is not complete", and thus, to a certain extent the data are estimates to a greater degree than one might prefer in an ideal circumstance. Thus, any statements about trends in the overall incidence of TB and particularly drug resistant TB have to be taken with a degree of uncertainty. it is possible that the increase in MDR cases reported in the data represents an increase in detection without a true increase in the number of new cases--time...
read full comment
A word of caution: one should take into account the coverage of drug susceptibility testing when interpreting results (Susan van den Hof, 16 January 2013)
We very much welcome the publication of results on tuberculosis epidemiology from Kazakhstan in BMC Infectious Diseases by researchers from within the country. It is important that insights from Kazakhstan and other Central Asian countries are shared with the international, non Russian speaking, community....
read full comment
Response to Dr. Marek Smieja, (Lars Öhrmalm, 10 December 2012)
Dr. Marek Smieja,
Thank you for your valuable comments!
I agree that the depth is an important variable ¿ maybe the most important? However, we wanted to evaluate the possibility of using a depth of 1-1.5 cm in order to minimize the risk of discomfort. Although far from the probable site of replication, the sensitivity of real-time PCR could have compensated for that. We found NPA significantly superior to the fNS in collecting epithelial cells and discussed that this could be the reason for the difference (although not statistically significant) in viral detection between the methods. Once again, thank you for your comments and recommendations!
Kind regards,
Lars Öhrmalm, MD PhD
Karolinska Institutet/Karolinska University Hospital
read full comment
Comment on: Öhrmalm et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:340
Transmission of tuberculosis from patients with drug resistant disease: type of contact, IPT and smear status of source cases matter. (Eduardo Hernandez-Garduno, 10 December 2012)
This study showed higher rates of TST positivity and disease in close contacts exposed to TB cases with multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) as compared to contacts exposed to drug-sensitive cases. Exposure to isoniazid mono-resistance (HMR-TB) cases was associated with TST positivity only. However there are three major limitations to consider in this study: 1) The study included two types of close contacts: household contacts i.e. those sharing the same house with the source case and type 1 i.e. contacts sharing airspace with the source case for >4 hours per week. The exact time of exposure and closeness to the source case were not ascertained in the study because this information is not routinely captured in the BCCDC TB registry. According to these definitions it is likely that the...
read full comment
Typing error in the abstract (Ursula Hoffmann, 22 October 2012)
Abstract, methods section, 3rd sentence:
Corrected sentence:
"Additionally, supernatants of these adipocytes as well as serum levels of leptin (!) were measured in blood of 104 severe septic patients by ELISA-method."
read full comment
Comment on: Behnes et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:217
Post-publication Correction (Robert Dourmashkin, 26 September 2012)
In our article on encephalitis lethargica, in Tables 1 and 2, one of the control specimens was incorrectly labelled. The specimen labelled #8854127 should read "885427".
read full comment
Helminth Egg Detection and Immunological Data (Miles Markus, 16 July 2012)
The authors are to be congratulated on their interpretation of the results of this study. Around the time that Dr John Fincham (now retired) co-conceived the investigation, he suggested that where helminthiasis is endemic, egg negative status does not necessarily reflect the immunological situation which is relevant to co-infection. This was largely a theoretical idea. He then reported South African research results that support the hypothesis [1]. They showed that people with no detectable Ascaris eggs in faeces were frequently seropositive for this helminth. In addition, the whole subject was elaborated upon elsewhere [2]. It is good to see that the article by Mkhize-Kwitshana et al. reflects the validity of the concept. The attention of readers of BMC Infectious Diseases is drawn to the...
read full comment
Comment on: Neupane et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:76
Correction (Peter Russo, 12 January 2012)
Figure 4B is the correct photograph of the left eye but, as shown, the image is flipped left to right.
read full comment
Comment on: Gao et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:260
Fosfomycin therapy for difficult-to-treat MRSA infection (Amorn Leelarasamee, 03 November 2011)
Dear Sir, I would like to congratulate the authors for reporting this useful and stimulating case and the journal for publishing the case report.1 I and some ID physicians in Thailand have been using fosfomycin for quite long time to treat infections due to MRSA. My comment is that the high impact-factor journal does not mention the use of fosfomycin for MRSA infection even if the infection due to MRSA fails to respond to vancomycin or daptomycin.2,3 So the report of this case provides an useful option to help global physicians in solving the problem of difficult-to-treat MRSA infections. My questions for this case are the method of intravenous administration of fosfomycin 6 gm every 6 hours for 56 days and its adverse reaction. My experience with this high daily dose...
read full comment
Comment on: Chen et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:152
Author's Reply (Anne Fiquet, 11 August 2011)
We are grateful to Valter Torri for sharing with us his comments on the conclusive statement of our article and therefore giving us the opportunity to reply.
Before discussing the essence of the comment, we would like to highlight that the results of the study were reported with openness and transparency. This includes for example, making a clear distinction between primary and secondary endpoints and between pre-specified and post-hoc analyses. This is done with the willingness that each reader can fully understand the study results, so did Valter Torri.
The method for controlling type I error rate (Union-Intersection [UI] method) is explained in the protocol which fully complies with the ICH E9 guideline. This is translated in the article by the requirement (repeated...
read full comment
Comment on: Hung et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:91
Correction to randomization results (Gregory Lucas, 13 June 2011)
In Figure 1 and in the text (page 4) we incorrectly indicated that 56 subjects were randomly assigned to DAART and 51 to SAT. The correct numbers are 55 and 52 randomly assigned to DAART and SAT, respectively.
read full comment
Comment on: Mullen et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:45
figure 2 (Firdaus Hamid, 23 May 2011)
Dear Editor of BMC Infectious Diseases and Reader.
We found some minor mistakes in figure 2: 1. In the box of participants one part is missing 1058 households, should be 1058 households (HH). 2. In the box of randomization it was stated HH, it should be HH RANDOMIZATION.
Comment on: Hamid et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:83
Not all Nasal Swabs Are Equivalent: Nasal Anterior Nares Swabs and Nasal Mid-Turbinate Swabs (Marek Smieja, 03 March 2011)
I congratulate Dr. Ohrmalm and colleagues for this study comparing nasal swabs with nasopharyngeal aspirates. I share their enthusiasm for examining pre-analytic aspects of specimen collection to optimize diagnostic yield while maintaining patient comfort and staff biosafety.
As an infectious diseases physician, microbiologist and researcher who has invested considerable time and effort in examining nasal-based diagnostics, I would like to point out potential limitations to the current study:
1. The anatomical site of investigation for the “nasal swab” was the anterior nares, 1.0-1.5 cm into the nose, using a swab designed for sampling this site for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We have designed a nasal “mid-...
read full comment
Comment on: Öhrmalm et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:340
The 25(OH)D assay used may have overestimated levels for smokers (William B. Grant, 13 January 2011)
Interesting results. However, there may be an error in the findings. As noted in the paper: "About 78% of men with TB were smokers, and this prevalence was significantly higher than in controls (61%, P = 0.007)."
A recent paper reported that the serum 25(OH)D assay used, ELICA, found higher values for smokers than nonsmokers: "In the population-based study, the serum levels of 25(OH)D using the ECLIA method were 51.9, 53.2 and 72.0 nmol/l in never, former and current smokers (P<0.01). In the validation study, the serum concentration of 25(OH)D was 10.3 nmol/l higher in smokers than in non-smokers (P<0.01) using the ECLIA (Roche), while non-significantly lower serum levels of 25(OH)D were found in smokers using the other five methods." [Grimnes et al....
read full comment
Comment on: Ho-Pham et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:306
CD36 -/- deficiency adavntages (Christine Hamblin, 26 October 2010)
This work clearly indicates a positive outcome for cattle that are CD36 -/-. Does other work show a contra-indication for gene deletion or is this a possible future defence for the national herd against bovine TB?
read full comment
Comment on: Hawkes et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:299
ERRATUM (Joao Pinto, 11 August 2010)
In Methods: the sentence “This strain has a known microsatellite profile for the loci used that differs from the widespread dhfr triple mutant lineage of Asian origin (Roper C pers comm.)” should read “This strain has a known microsatellite profile for the loci used that matches the widespread dhfr triple mutant lineage of Asian origin (Roper C pers comm.)”
In Discussion: the sentence “This strain has a microsatellite profile that differs from the intercontinental widespread triple mutant haplotype of Southeast Asian origin (Roper C. pers. comm.)” should read “This strain has a microsatellite profile that matches the intercontinental widespread triple mutant haplotype of Southeast Asian origin (Roper C. pers. comm.)”
Concerns regarding conclusion of study on evaluation of non-inferiority of intradermal versus adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine. (Valter Torri, 05 August 2010)
In this study on an elderly population, the immunogenicity of an intradermal seasonal influenza vaccine was compared with that of an adjuvanted vaccine. The primary hypothesis to be tested was that the immunogenicity of the intradermal vaccine would be non-inferior to that of the adjuvanted vaccine for each virus strain in terms of antibody titres determined using HI. Non-inferiority was defined as the upper bound of the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around the post-vaccination ratios (adjuvanted vaccine/intradermal vaccine) of geometric mean titres (GMTs) being <1.5 for all three strains in the per-protocol set. Based on the stated hypothesis, non-inferiority can only be demonstrated if the null-hypothesis is rejected for all three strains. If this study had been designed to...
read full comment
So there's no evidence of benefit, then? (Peter English, 05 August 2010)
The conclusion starts "In conclusion, our results suggest that entry screening could delay local transmission for an additional 1-2 weeks" (and in the abstract "Entry screening may lead to short-term delays in local transmission of a novel strain of influenza virus"). Yet the results section states that the 95% confidence interval includes zero, and the discussion starts "Our results suggest that entry screening did not lead to substantial delays in local H1N1 transmission".
I take home the message: there is no evidence that entry screening delays the transmission of H1N1 in a country. This could be because it doesn't; or it could be because studies designed to look for such evidence have been under-powered to detect it.
read full comment
Comment on: Cowling et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:82
Update on the Catalonia outbreak (Filippo Curtale, 03 June 2010)
The Catalonia outbreak lasted from August 2006 to July 2007, with a final count of 381 cases. Data presented in the paper are referred to an EuroSurveillance publication when the outbreak was still ongoing. Final data, after the end of the outbreak, were published by: Dominguez A, Torner N, Barrabeig I et al. Large outbreak of measles in a community with high vaccination coverage: implications for the vaccination schedule. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47:1143-9 read full comment
Comment on: Curtale et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:62
Multiple same references in bibilography (Rajnish Joshi, 12 May 2010)
This article has 44 references. The reference "Pai M, O'Brien R: Tuberculosis diagnostics trials: do they lack methodological rigor? Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2006, 6:509-514." is however numbered thrice as number 21, 36, and 41.
Some minor errours in Methods part (Akihiro Ohkado, 10 May 2010)
We noticed some minor errours of the units described in the last two sentences of the third paragraph under Methods part of this manuscript. The units described in the sentences, "ml", "mM", and "uC" should read as "μl", "μM", and "°C" respectively. The full two sentences, therefore, should read as "In brief, the PCR mixture was prepared in a 20 μl volume with GC PCR buffer I, 0.5 U Ex Taq, 200 μM each of four dNTPs, 0.5 μM each of the primer set and 10 ng template DNA. PCR was carried out for all loci under the following conditions: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 5 minutes, and then 35 cycles of 94 °C for 30 seconds, 63 °C for 30 seconds and 72 °C for 3 minutes, followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 7 minutes [8]." We...
read full comment
Comment on: Ohkado et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 9:138
Betalactamin induced flare of Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (vincent descamps, 08 April 2010)
I read with great interest the report of Gentile et al. We have reported the first case of association of HHV-6 reactivation and DRESS in 1996 (1). They described a typical case of lamotrigin-induced DRESS in a 26-year old woman. I would like to insist on one important feature of DRESS that was recently described. Antibiotics are often given at the beginning of the DRESS because of a false diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis. A flare of DRESS is often observed after betalactamin intake with an increase or development of cutaneous lesions (2). This flare is concommitant to the mononucleosis syndrome. This feature is reminiscent of the amoxicillin-induced rash in mononucleosis syndrome. We recently published 7 cases of amoxicillin-induced flare in DRESS. DRESS were induced by other drugs. In...
read full comment
Comment on: Gentile et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:49
RSS
Latest comments
Error in authors' information (Sebastien Poulin, 13 February 2013)
Anik St-Denis is from Department of Microbiology and Immunology and Centre de recherche du CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,
not from
Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. read full comment
Comment on: Poulin et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 13:24
Response to Susan van den Hof (Assel Terlikbayeva, 24 January 2013)
1) We worked with data supplied to us from the Kazakh National TB Control Program and the National Institute of Geography. We did not generate the data ourselves, and we cannot attest to the accuracy of how it was collected and how accurate it is. As was pointed out in your comment the "actual coverage and reporting of results has not been and still is not complete", and thus, to a certain extent the data are estimates to a greater degree than one might prefer in an ideal circumstance. Thus, any statements about trends in the overall incidence of TB and particularly drug resistant TB have to be taken with a degree of uncertainty. it is possible that the increase in MDR cases reported in the data represents an increase in detection without a true increase in the number of new cases--time... read full comment
Comment on: Terlikbayeva et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:262
A word of caution: one should take into account the coverage of drug susceptibility testing when interpreting results (Susan van den Hof, 16 January 2013)
We very much welcome the publication of results on tuberculosis epidemiology from Kazakhstan in BMC Infectious Diseases by researchers from within the country. It is important that insights from Kazakhstan and other Central Asian countries are shared with the international, non Russian speaking, community.... read full comment
Comment on: Terlikbayeva et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:262
Response to Dr. Marek Smieja, (Lars Öhrmalm, 10 December 2012)
Dr. Marek Smieja,
Thank you for your valuable comments!
I agree that the depth is an important variable ¿ maybe the most important? However, we wanted to evaluate the possibility of using a depth of 1-1.5 cm in order to minimize the risk of discomfort. Although far from the probable site of replication, the sensitivity of real-time PCR could have compensated for that. We found NPA significantly superior to the fNS in collecting epithelial cells and discussed that this could be the reason for the difference (although not statistically significant) in viral detection between the methods. Once again, thank you for your comments and recommendations!
Kind regards,
Lars Öhrmalm, MD PhD
Karolinska Institutet/Karolinska University Hospital read full comment
Comment on: Öhrmalm et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:340
Transmission of tuberculosis from patients with drug resistant disease: type of contact, IPT and smear status of source cases matter. (Eduardo Hernandez-Garduno, 10 December 2012)
This study showed higher rates of TST positivity and disease in close contacts exposed to TB cases with multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) as compared to contacts exposed to drug-sensitive cases. Exposure to isoniazid mono-resistance (HMR-TB) cases was associated with TST positivity only. However there are three major limitations to consider in this study: 1) The study included two types of close contacts: household contacts i.e. those sharing the same house with the source case and type 1 i.e. contacts sharing airspace with the source case for >4 hours per week. The exact time of exposure and closeness to the source case were not ascertained in the study because this information is not routinely captured in the BCCDC TB registry. According to these definitions it is likely that the... read full comment
Comment on: Johnston et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:266
Typing error in the abstract (Ursula Hoffmann, 22 October 2012)
Abstract, methods section, 3rd sentence: Corrected sentence: "Additionally, supernatants of these adipocytes as well as serum levels of leptin (!) were measured in blood of 104 severe septic patients by ELISA-method." read full comment
Comment on: Behnes et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:217
Post-publication Correction (Robert Dourmashkin, 26 September 2012)
In our article on encephalitis lethargica, in Tables 1 and 2, one of the control specimens was incorrectly labelled. The specimen labelled #8854127 should read "885427". read full comment
Comment on: Dourmashkin et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:136
Helminth Egg Detection and Immunological Data (Miles Markus, 16 July 2012)
The authors are to be congratulated on their interpretation of the results of this study. Around the time that Dr John Fincham (now retired) co-conceived the investigation, he suggested that where helminthiasis is endemic, egg negative status does not necessarily reflect the immunological situation which is relevant to co-infection. This was largely a theoretical idea. He then reported South African research results that support the hypothesis [1]. They showed that people with no detectable Ascaris eggs in faeces were frequently seropositive for this helminth. In addition, the whole subject was elaborated upon elsewhere [2]. It is good to see that the article by Mkhize-Kwitshana et al. reflects the validity of the concept. The attention of readers of BMC Infectious Diseases is drawn to the... read full comment
Comment on: Mkhize-Kwitshana et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:273
Correction: Ref #17 PLoS ONE 2011 (not 2001) (Jiun-Hau Huang, 28 June 2012)
Dear... read full comment
Comment on: Neupane et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 12:76
Correction (Peter Russo, 12 January 2012)
Figure 4B is the correct photograph of the left eye but, as shown, the image is flipped left to right. read full comment
Comment on: Gao et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:260
Fosfomycin therapy for difficult-to-treat MRSA infection (Amorn Leelarasamee, 03 November 2011)
Dear Sir,
I would like to congratulate the authors for reporting this useful and stimulating case and the journal for publishing the case report.1 I and some ID physicians in Thailand have been using fosfomycin for quite long time to treat infections due to MRSA.
My comment is that the high impact-factor journal does not mention the use of fosfomycin for MRSA infection even if the infection due to MRSA fails to respond to vancomycin or daptomycin.2,3 So the report of this case provides an useful option to help global physicians in solving the problem of difficult-to-treat MRSA infections.
My questions for this case are the method of intravenous administration of fosfomycin 6 gm every 6 hours for 56 days and its adverse reaction. My experience with this high daily dose... read full comment
Comment on: Chen et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:152
Author's Reply (Anne Fiquet, 11 August 2011)
We are grateful to Valter Torri for sharing with us his comments on the conclusive statement of our article and therefore giving us the opportunity to reply.
Before discussing the essence of the comment, we would like to highlight that the results of the study were reported with openness and transparency. This includes for example, making a clear distinction between primary and secondary endpoints and between pre-specified and post-hoc analyses. This is done with the willingness that each reader can fully understand the study results, so did Valter Torri.
The method for controlling type I error rate (Union-Intersection [UI] method) is explained in the protocol which fully complies with the ICH E9 guideline. This is translated in the article by the requirement (repeated... read full comment
Comment on: Van Damme et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:134
minor errors in Table 1 (Tsung Chain Chang, 13 June 2011)
1. Table 1, at the line Chaetomium cochlioides, Total no. of strains
should be 3, not 7.
2. Table 1, at the bottom line Total strains, Total no. of strains
should be 73, not 77.
read full comment
Comment on: Hung et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:91
Correction to randomization results (Gregory Lucas, 13 June 2011)
In Figure 1 and in the text (page 4) we incorrectly indicated that 56 subjects were randomly assigned to DAART and 51 to SAT. The correct numbers are 55 and 52 randomly assigned to DAART and SAT, respectively. read full comment
Comment on: Mullen et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:45
figure 2 (Firdaus Hamid, 23 May 2011)
Dear Editor of BMC Infectious Diseases and Reader.
We found some minor mistakes in figure 2:
1. In the box of participants one part is missing 1058 households, should be 1058 households (HH).
2. In the box of randomization it was stated HH, it should be HH RANDOMIZATION.
Thank you,
Best regards,
Firdaus Hamid read full comment
Comment on: Hamid et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 11:83
Not all Nasal Swabs Are Equivalent: Nasal Anterior Nares Swabs and Nasal Mid-Turbinate Swabs (Marek Smieja, 03 March 2011)
I congratulate Dr. Ohrmalm and colleagues for this study comparing nasal swabs with nasopharyngeal aspirates. I share their enthusiasm for examining pre-analytic aspects of specimen collection to optimize diagnostic yield while maintaining patient comfort and staff biosafety.
As an infectious diseases physician, microbiologist and researcher who has invested considerable time and effort in examining nasal-based diagnostics, I would like to point out potential limitations to the current study:
1. The anatomical site of investigation for the “nasal swab” was the anterior nares, 1.0-1.5 cm into the nose, using a swab designed for sampling this site for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We have designed a nasal “mid-... read full comment
Comment on: Öhrmalm et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:340
The 25(OH)D assay used may have overestimated levels for smokers (William B. Grant, 13 January 2011)
Interesting results. However, there may be an error in the findings. As noted in the paper:
"About 78% of men with TB were smokers, and this prevalence was significantly higher than in controls
(61%, P = 0.007)."
A recent paper reported that the serum 25(OH)D assay used, ELICA, found higher values for smokers than nonsmokers:
"In the population-based study, the serum levels of 25(OH)D using the ECLIA method were 51.9, 53.2 and 72.0 nmol/l in never, former and current smokers (P<0.01). In the validation study, the serum concentration of 25(OH)D was 10.3 nmol/l higher in smokers than in non-smokers (P<0.01) using the ECLIA (Roche), while non-significantly lower serum levels of 25(OH)D were found in smokers using the other five methods." [Grimnes et al.... read full comment
Comment on: Ho-Pham et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:306
CD36 -/- deficiency adavntages (Christine Hamblin, 26 October 2010)
This work clearly indicates a positive outcome for cattle that are CD36 -/-. Does other work show a contra-indication for gene deletion or is this a possible future defence for the national herd against bovine TB? read full comment
Comment on: Hawkes et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:299
ERRATUM (Joao Pinto, 11 August 2010)
In Methods: the sentence “This strain has a known microsatellite profile for the loci used that differs from the widespread dhfr triple mutant lineage of Asian origin (Roper C pers comm.)” should read “This strain has a known microsatellite profile for the loci used that matches the widespread dhfr triple mutant lineage of Asian origin (Roper C pers comm.)”
In Discussion: the sentence “This strain has a microsatellite profile that differs from the intercontinental widespread triple mutant haplotype of Southeast Asian origin (Roper C. pers. comm.)” should read “This strain has a microsatellite profile that matches the intercontinental widespread triple mutant haplotype of Southeast Asian origin (Roper C. pers. comm.)”
In... read full comment
Comment on: Salgueiro et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:163
Concerns regarding conclusion of study on evaluation of non-inferiority of intradermal versus adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine. (Valter Torri, 05 August 2010)
In this study on an elderly population, the immunogenicity of an intradermal seasonal influenza vaccine was compared with that of an adjuvanted vaccine. The primary hypothesis to be tested was that the immunogenicity of the intradermal vaccine would be non-inferior to that of the adjuvanted vaccine for each virus strain in terms of antibody titres determined using HI. Non-inferiority was defined as the upper bound of the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around the post-vaccination ratios (adjuvanted vaccine/intradermal vaccine) of geometric mean titres (GMTs) being <1.5 for all three strains in the per-protocol set. Based on the stated hypothesis, non-inferiority can only be demonstrated if the null-hypothesis is rejected for all three strains. If this study had been designed to... read full comment
Comment on: Van Damme et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:134
So there's no evidence of benefit, then? (Peter English, 05 August 2010)
The conclusion starts "In conclusion, our results suggest that entry screening could delay local transmission for an additional 1-2 weeks" (and in the abstract "Entry screening may lead to short-term delays in local transmission of a novel strain of influenza virus"). Yet the results section states that the 95% confidence interval includes zero, and the discussion starts "Our results suggest that entry screening did not lead to substantial delays in local H1N1 transmission".
I take home the message: there is no evidence that entry screening delays the transmission of H1N1 in a country. This could be because it doesn't; or it could be because studies designed to look for such evidence have been under-powered to detect it. read full comment
Comment on: Cowling et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:82
Update on the Catalonia outbreak (Filippo Curtale, 03 June 2010)
The Catalonia outbreak lasted from August 2006 to July 2007, with a final count of 381 cases.
Data presented in the paper are referred to an EuroSurveillance publication when the outbreak was still ongoing. Final data, after the end of the outbreak, were published by: Dominguez A, Torner N, Barrabeig I et al. Large outbreak of measles in a community with high vaccination coverage: implications for the vaccination schedule. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47:1143-9
read full comment
Comment on: Curtale et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:62
Multiple same references in bibilography (Rajnish Joshi, 12 May 2010)
This article has 44 references.
The reference "Pai M, O'Brien R: Tuberculosis diagnostics trials: do they lack
methodological rigor? Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2006, 6:509-514." is however numbered thrice as number 21, 36, and 41.
Probably calling for more editorial attention !! read full comment
Comment on: Cattamanchi et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 9:53
Some minor errours in Methods part (Akihiro Ohkado, 10 May 2010)
We noticed some minor errours of the units described in the last two sentences of the third paragraph under Methods part of this manuscript. The units described in the sentences, "ml", "mM", and "uC" should read as "μl", "μM", and "°C" respectively. The full two sentences, therefore, should read as "In brief, the PCR mixture was prepared in a 20 μl volume with GC PCR buffer I, 0.5 U Ex Taq, 200 μM each of four dNTPs, 0.5 μM each of the primer set and 10 ng template DNA. PCR was carried out for all loci under the following conditions: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 5 minutes, and then 35 cycles of 94 °C for 30 seconds, 63 °C for 30 seconds and 72 °C for 3 minutes, followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 7 minutes [8]."
We... read full comment
Comment on: Ohkado et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 9:138
Betalactamin induced flare of Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (vincent descamps, 08 April 2010)
I read with great interest the report of Gentile et al. We have reported the first case of association of HHV-6 reactivation and DRESS in 1996 (1). They described a typical case of lamotrigin-induced DRESS in a 26-year old woman. I would like to insist on one important feature of DRESS that was recently described. Antibiotics are often given at the beginning of the DRESS because of a false diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis. A flare of DRESS is often observed after betalactamin intake with an increase or development of cutaneous lesions (2). This flare is concommitant to the mononucleosis syndrome. This feature is reminiscent of the amoxicillin-induced rash in mononucleosis syndrome. We recently published 7 cases of amoxicillin-induced flare in DRESS. DRESS were induced by other drugs. In... read full comment
Comment on: Gentile et al. BMC Infectious Diseases, 10:49