Background Our aim was to estimate provisional willingness to receive a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, identify predictive socio-demographic factors, and, principally, determine potential causes in order to guide information provision. Methods A non-probability online survey was conducted (24th September−17th October 2020) with 5,114 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income, and region. The Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale assessed intent to take an approved vaccine. Structural equation modelling estimated explanatory factor relationships. Results 71.7% (n=3,667) were willing to be vaccinated, 16.6% (n=849) were very unsure, and 11.7% (n=598) were strongly hesitant. An excellent model fit (RMSEA=0.05/CFI=0.97/TLI=0.97), explaining 86% of variance in hesitancy, was provided by beliefs about the collective importance, efficacy, side-effects, and speed of development of a COVID-19 vaccine. A second model, with reasonable fit (RMSEA=0.03/CFI=0.93/TLI=0.92), explaining 32% of variance, highlighted two higher-order explanatory factors: ‘excessive mistrust’ (r=0.51), including conspiracy beliefs, negative views of doctors, and need for chaos, and ‘positive healthcare experiences’ (r=−0.48), including supportive doctor interactions and good NHS care. Hesitancy was associated with younger age, female gender, lower income, and ethnicity, but socio-demographic information explained little variance (9.8%). Hesitancy was associated with lower adherence to social distancing guidelines. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is relatively evenly spread across the population. Willingness to take a vaccine is closely bound to recognition of the collective importance. Vaccine public information that highlights prosocial benefits may be especially effective. Factors such as conspiracy beliefs that foster mistrust and erode social cohesion will lower vaccine up-take.

Background The effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination programme depends on mass participation: the greater the number of people vaccinated, the less risk to the population. Concise, persuasive messaging is crucial, particularly given substantial levels of vaccine hesitancy in the UK. Our aim was to test which types of written information about COVID-19 vaccination, in addition to a statement of efficacy and safety, might increase vaccine acceptance. Methods For this single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, we aimed to recruit 15 000 adults in the UK, who were quota sampled to be representative. Participants were randomly assigned equally across ten information conditions stratified by level of vaccine acceptance (willing, doubtful, or strongly hesitant). The control information condition comprised the safety and effectiveness statement taken from the UK National Health Service website; the remaining conditions addressed collective benefit, personal benefit, seriousness of the pandemic, and safety concerns. After online provision of vaccination information, participants completed the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (outcome measure; score range 7–35) and the Oxford Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale (mediation measure). The primary outcome was willingness to be vaccinated. Participants were analysed in the groups they were allocated. p values were adjusted for multiple comparisons. The study was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN37254291. Findings From Jan 19 to Feb 5, 2021, 15 014 adults were recruited. Vaccine hesitancy had reduced from 26·9% the previous year to 16·9%, so recruitment was extended to Feb 18 to recruit 3841 additional vaccine-hesitant adults. 12 463 (66·1%) participants were classified as willing, 2932 (15·6%) as doubtful, and 3460 (18·4%) as strongly hesitant (ie, report that they will avoid being vaccinated for as long as possible or will never get vaccinated). Information conditions did not alter COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in those willing or doubtful (adjusted p values >0·70). In those strongly hesitant, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was reduced, in comparison to the control condition, by personal benefit information (mean difference –1·49, 95% CI –2·16 to –0·82; adjusted p=0·0015), directly addressing safety concerns about speed of development (−0·91, –1·58 to –0·23; adjusted p=0·0261), and a combination of all information (−0·86, –1·53 to –0·18; adjusted p=0·0313). In those strongly hesitant, provision of personal benefit information reduced hesitancy to a greater extent than provision of information on the collective benefit of not personally getting ill (−0·97, 95% CI –1·64 to –0·30; adjusted p=0·0165) or the collective benefit of not transmitting the virus (−1·01, –1·68 to –0·35; adjusted p=0·0150). Ethnicity and gender were found to moderate information condition outcomes. Interpretation In the approximately 10% of the population who are strongly hesitant ...

Stress has an emerging role in cancer and targeting stress-related β-adrenergic receptors (AR) has been proposed as a potential therapeutic approach in melanoma. Here we report that β3-AR expression correlates with melanoma aggressiveness. In addition, we highlight that β3-AR expression is not only restricted to cancer cells, but it is also expressed in vivo in stromal, inflammatory and vascular cells of the melanoma microenvironment. Particularly, we demonstrated that β3-AR can (i) instruct melanoma cells to respond to environmental stimuli, (ii) enhance melanoma cells response to stromal fibroblasts and macrophages, (iii) increase melanoma cell motility and (iv) induce stem-like traits. Noteworthy, β3-AR activation in melanoma accessory cells drives stromal reactivity by inducing pro-inflammatory cytokines secretion and de novo angiogenesis, sustaining tumor growth and melanoma aggressiveness. β3-ARs also play a mandatory role in the recruitment to tumor sites of circulating stromal cells precursors, in the differentiation of these cells towards different lineages, further favoring tumor inflammation, angiogenesis and ultimately melanoma malignancy. Our findings validate selective β3-AR antagonists as potential promising anti-metastatic agents. These could be used to complement current therapeutic approaches for melanoma patients (e.g. propranolol) by targeting non-neoplastic stromal cells, hence reducing therapy resistance of melanoma.

Recent studies sight b-adrenergic receptor (AR) antagonists as novel therapeutic agents for melanoma, as they may reduce disease progression. Here within, we evaluated the expression of b-ARs in a series of human cutaneous melanocytic lesions, and studied the effect of their endogenous agonists, norepinephrine (NE) and epinephrine (E), on primary and metastatic human melanoma cell lines. Using immunohistochemistry, we found that both b1-and b2-ARs are expressed in tissues from benign melanocytic naevi, atypical naevi and malignant melanomas and that expression was significantly higher in malignant tumours. Melanoma cell lines (human A375 primary melanoma cell line and human Hs29-4T metastatic melanoma cell lines) also expressed b1-and b2-ARs by measuring transcripts and proteins. NE or E increased metalloprotease-dependent motility, released interleukin-6 and 8 (IL-6, IL-8) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). These effects of catecholamines were inhibited by the unselective b-AR antagonist propranolol. The role of soluble factors elicited by catecholamines seemed pleiotropic as VEGF synergized with NE increased melanoma invasiveness through 3D barriers, while IL-6 participated in stromal fibroblast activation towards a myofibroblastic phenotype. Our results indicate that NE and E produce in vitro via b-ARs activation a number of biological responses that may exert a pro-tumorigenic effect in melanoma cell lines. The observation that b-ARs are upregulated in malignant melanoma tissues support the hypothesis that circulating catecholamines NE and E, by activating their receptors, favour melanoma progression in vivo. Melanoma represents the most aggressive type of skin cancer, with an increasing incidence found especially in young adults. A significant reduction in mortality has been not observed, despite a noteworthy improvement in early diagnosis achieved in recent years. 1 At present, no medical option can cure metastatic melanoma (MM) and the only effective treatment for the eradication of the disease is early-phase surgery. 2 Hence, increased knowledge of the biological pathways underlying the process of melanoma dissemination and metastasis is crucial in order to identify new therapeutic targets.Previous studies have shown that various human solid tumours, such as breast, colon, prostatic, ovary, nasopharyngeal and oral cancer, express b2-adrenoceptor (b2-AR), raising the possibility that such receptors may affect invasion and dissemination processes. [3][4][5][6][7][8] Moreover, some stress neurotransmitters, such as norepinephrine (NE) and epinephrine (E), have been demonstrated to contribute to the regulation of tumour cell invasion, at least in part through b-AR activation. 6,7,9 Interactions between tumour cells and soluble factors originated from the nervous system has recently been proposed to favour metastasis formation. 10 Improved survival rates have been demonstrated in mice with metastatic tumour by combined administration of b-AR antagonists. 11 In addition, recent evidence suggests a ...

We explore the implications of online social endorsement for the Covid-19 vaccination program in the United Kingdom. Vaccine hesitancy is a long-standing problem, but it has assumed great urgency due to the pandemic. By early 2021, the United Kingdom had the world’s highest Covid-19 mortality per million of population. Our survey of a nationally representative sample of UK adults ( N = 5,114) measured socio-demographics, social and political attitudes, media diet for getting news about Covid-19, and intention to use social media and personal messaging apps to encourage or discourage vaccination against Covid-19. Cluster analysis identified six distinct media diet groups: news avoiders, mainstream/official news samplers, super seekers, omnivores, the social media dependent, and the TV dependent. We assessed whether these media diets, together with key attitudes, including Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy, conspiracy mentality, and the news-finds-me attitude (meaning giving less priority to active monitoring of news and relying more on one’s online networks of friends for information), predict the intention to encourage or discourage vaccination. Overall, super-seeker and omnivorous media diets are more likely than other media diets to be associated with the online encouragement of vaccination. Combinations of (a) news avoidance and high levels of the news-finds-me attitude and (b) social media dependence and high levels of conspiracy mentality are most likely to be associated with online discouragement of vaccination. In the direct statistical model, a TV-dependent media diet is more likely to be associated with online discouragement of vaccination, but the moderation model shows that a TV-dependent diet most strongly attenuates the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and discouraging vaccination. Our findings support public health communication based on four main methods. First, direct contact, through the post, workplace, or community structures, and through phone counseling via local health services, could reach the news avoiders. Second, TV public information advertisements should point to authoritative information sources, such as National Health Service (NHS) and other public health websites, which should then feature clear and simple ways for people to share material among their online social networks. Third, informative social media campaigns will provide super seekers with good resources to share, while also encouraging the social media dependent to browse away from social media platforms and visit reliable and authoritative online sources. Fourth, social media companies should expand and intensify their removal of vaccine disinformation and anti-vax accounts, and such efforts should be monitored by well-resourced, independent organizations.