No abstract

No abstract

Introduction Patients with alopecia areata (AA) experience psychological and psychosocial symptoms including depression, anxiety, anger, social withdrawal, embarrassment, and low self-esteem. While multiple studies have measured the detrimental emotional impact of AA on patient quality of life, evidence of its effect on work productivity loss (WPL) and daily activities is limited. This study aimed to assess the extent of AA-related emotional symptom (ES) burden on work productivity and activity impairment. Methods A cross-sectional survey of dermatologists and their adult patients with AA was conducted in the USA in 2019. Dermatologists provided assessments of patients’ clinical characteristics, while patients completed sociodemographic questionnaires along with two validated patient-reported outcome measures of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) and the AA Patient Priority Outcomes (AAPPO) ES subscale. The WPAI assessed AA-related WPL (employed respondents) and activity impairment (all respondents), and the AAPPO-ES assessed AA-related frequency of feeling self-conscious, embarrassed, sad, or frustrated. Multiple linear regression models were fitted to both WPAI scores with the AAPPO ES as an independent variable. Results A total of 242 patients with a mean (SD) age of 39.2 (13.3) years, treated by 59 dermatologists, were evaluated. Mean (SD) ES score was 2.0 (1.1). Mean (SD) work productivity loss [ n = 170] and activity impairment [ n = 242] were 12.2% (17.4%) and 13.3% (18.3%), respectively. After adjusting for covariates, WPL increased by 4.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6–6.7%; p = 0.002] and activity impairment increased by 3.1% (95% CI 0.7–5.4%; p = 0.010) for every 1-point increase in ES. For an average patient, a 1-SD decrease (about 1 point) on the ES scale substantially reduced WPL and activity impairment (by at least 25%). Conclusions Patients with AA reported significant increases in WPL and activity impairment associated with worsening AA-related ES. These findings underscore the substantial emotional and psychosocial burden among patients with AA and a need for improved treatment options. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00864-1.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: As the body of evidence on COVID-19 and post-vaccination outcomes continues to expand, this analysis sought to evaluate the public health impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, BNT162b2, during the first year of its rollout in the US. Methods: A combined Markov decision tree model compared clinical and economic outcomes of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (BNT162b2) versus no vaccination in individuals aged ≥12 years. Age-stratified epidemiological, clinical, economic, and humanistic parameters were derived from existing data and published literature. Scenario analysis explored the impact of using lower and upper bounds of parameters on the results. The health benefits were estimated as the number of COVID-19 symptomatic cases, hospitalizations and deaths averted, and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) saved. The economic benefits were estimated as the amount of healthcare and societal cost savings associated with the vaccine-preventable health outcomes. Results: It was estimated that, in 2021, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (BNT162b2) contributed to averting almost 9 million symptomatic cases, close to 700,000 hospitalizations, and over 110,000 deaths, resulting in an estimated $30.4 billion direct healthcare cost savings, $43.7 billion indirect cost savings related to productivity loss, as well as discounted gains of 1.1 million QALYs. Scenario analyses showed that these results were robust; the use of alternative plausible ranges of parameters did not change the interpretation of the findings. Conclusions: The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (BNT162b2) contributed to generate substantial public health impact and vaccine-preventable cost savings in the first year of its rollout in the US. The vaccine was estimated to prevent millions of COVID-19 symptomatic cases and thousands of hospitalizations and deaths, and these averted outcomes translated into cost-savings in the billions of US dollars and thousands of QALYs saved. As only direct impacts of vaccination were considered, these estimates may be conservative.

IntroductionFrom July through October of 2021, several countries issued recommendations for increased COVID-19 vaccine protection for individuals with one or more immunocompromised (IC) conditions. It is critically important to understand the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of COVID-19 vaccines among IC populations as recommendations are updated over time in response to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic.Areas coveredA targeted literature review was conducted to identify real-world studies that assessed COVID-19 VE in IC populations between December 2020 and September 2021. A total of 10 studies from four countries were identified and summarized in this review.Expert opinion/commentaryVE of the widely available COVID-19 vaccines, including BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen), and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca), ranged from 64%-90% against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 73%-84% against symptomatic illness, 70%-100% against severe illness, and 63%-100% against COVID-19-related hospitalization among the fully vaccinated IC populations included in the studies. COVID-19 VE for most outcomes in the IC populations included in these studies was lower than in the general populations. These findings provide preliminary evidence that the IC population requires greater protective measures to prevent COVID-19 infection and associated illness, hence should be prioritized while implementing recommendations of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses.