Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

C H Schmid

Publications and source records attributed to C H Schmid.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Effect of biocompatibility of hemodialysis membranes on mortality in acute renal failure: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of biocompatibility of hemodialysis membranes on mortality in acute renal failure (ARF) has been a subject of intense debate, with some, but not all studies reporting a lower risk of death among patients with ARF dialyzed with biocompatible membranes (BCM) compared to bioincompatible membranes (BICM). OBJECTIVES: We performed a meta-analysis of group data extracted from previously published studies of controlled clinical trials to assess the impact of BCM on the mortality among patients with ARF who required intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). METHODS: BCM and BICM were defined as synthetic and cellulose-derived membranes (cuprophan and cellulose acetate), respectively. All controlled clinical trials comparing the effect of BCM to BICM on clinical outcomes in the setting of ARF were included. Original articles as well as abstracts were included. Data in Tables, Figures, and text were independently extracted by 2 of the authors. Risk ratios (RR) for mortality were combined using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 722 patients met the inclusion criteria. One hundred seventy-two (45%) of 384 patients died in the BCM group, compared with 156 (46%) of 338 patients in the BICM group. The RRs for mortality ranged from 0.56-1.28. Overall, the pooled RR for mortality was 0.92 (95% CI = 0.76-1.13) in favor of the BCM group. However, the test for heterogeneity in RR among studies was significant (chi2 = 8.6, p < 0.05). One study accounted for this significance, and once removed from the model, the RR for mortality was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.79-1.12), and the test for heterogeneity among studies lost its significance. Subgroup analyses comparing BCM to cuprophan membranes revealed that the RR for mortality was 0.82 (95% CI = 0.62 - 1.08) in favor of the BCM group, whereas in the subgroup of studies comparing BCM to cellulose acetate, the RR for mortality was 1.11 (95% CI = 0.87-1.44) in favor of the BCM group. CONCLUSION: This metaanalysis demonstrates that the use of BCM does not significantly affect mortality among patients with ARF who require IHD. However, subgroup analyses suggest that cellulose acetate membranes may offer a survival advantage when compared with synthetic membranes, which, in turn, may be more beneficial than cuprophan membranes. Available evidence does not permit a recommendation for or against the use of BCM in ARF. Large trials and pooled analyses of individual patient-level data will be required to assess sources of variability among studies and non-fatal outcomes of ARF.

Acute Kidney Injury↗
PubMed2001

Marginal and dynamic regression models for longitudinal data.

Regression models for longitudinal data often employ random effects and serial correlation to account for residual variation between and within subjects. Most of these models are marginal models, separating the mean and covariance parameters. This paper discusses the use of dynamic models in which a lagged response serves as a predictor and compares these to marginal models. Regression parameters have a different interpretation in dynamic models as they describe changes in response levels, rather than the levels themselves. Lagged predictors are also useful with longitudinal data, explicitly quantifying the effect of previous levels of risk factors. These models are explored through analysis of data from the Childhood Respiratory Study, modelling lung function (FEV(1)) levels as a function of age, height, sex and smoking status in children measured over a five-year period.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and progression of nondiabetic renal disease. A meta-analysis of patient-level data.

PURPOSE: To examine the efficacy of ACE inhibitors for treatment of nondiabetic renal disease. DATA SOURCES: 11 randomized, controlled trials comparing the efficacy of antihypertensive regimens including ACE inhibitors to the efficacy of regimens without ACE inhibitors in predominantly nondiabetic renal disease. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were identified by searching the MEDLINE database for English-language studies evaluating the effects of ACE inhibitors on renal disease in humans between May 1977 (when ACE inhibitors were approved for trials in humans) and September 1997. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on 1860 nondiabetic patients were analyzed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Mean duration of follow-up was 2.2 years. Patients in the ACE inhibitor group had a greater mean decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (4.5 mm Hg [95% CI, 3.0 to 6.1 mm Hg]) and 2.3 mm Hg [CI, 1.4 to 3.2 mm Hg], respectively) and urinary protein excretion (0.46 g/d [CI, 0.33 to 0.59 g/d]). After adjustment for patient and study characteristics at baseline and changes in systolic blood pressure and urinary protein excretion during follow-up, relative risks in the ACE inhibitor group were 0.69 (CI, 0.51 to 0.94) for end-stage renal disease and 0.70 (CI, 0.55 to 0.88) for the combined outcome of doubling of the baseline serum creatinine concentration or end-stage renal disease. Patients with greater urinary protein excretion at baseline benefited more from ACE inhibitor therapy (P = 0.03 and P = 0.001, respectively), but the data were inconclusive as to whether the benefit extended to patients with baseline urinary protein excretion less than 0.5 g/d. CONCLUSION: Antihypertensive regimens that include ACE inhibitors are more effective than regimens without ACE inhibitors in slowing the progression of nondiabetic renal disease. The beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors is mediated by factors in addition to decreasing blood pressure and urinary protein excretion and is greater in patients with proteinuria. Angiotensin-converting inhibitors are indicated for treatment of nondiabetic patients with chronic renal disease and proteinuria and, possibly, those without proteinuria.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗
PubMed2001

Two controlled trials of antibiotic treatment in patients with persistent symptoms and a history of Lyme disease.

BACKGROUND: It is controversial whether prolonged antibiotic treatment is effective for patients in whom symptoms persist after the recommended antibiotic treatment for acute Lyme disease. METHODS: We conducted two randomized trials: one in 78 patients who were seropositive for IgG antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi at the time of enrollment and the other in 51 patients who were seronegative. The patients received either intravenous ceftriaxone, 2 g daily for 30 days, followed by oral doxycycline, 200 mg daily for 60 days, or matching intravenous and oral placebos. Each patient had well-documented, previously treated Lyme disease but had persistent musculoskeletal pain, neurocognitive symptoms, or dysesthesia, often associated with fatigue. The primary outcome measures were improvement on the physical- and mental-health-component summary scales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36)--a scale measuring the health-related quality of life--on day 180 of the study. RESULTS: After a planned interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the studies be discontinued because data from the first 107 patients indicated that it was highly unlikely that a significant difference in treatment efficacy between the groups would be observed with the planned full enrollment of 260 patients. Base-line assessments documented severe impairment in the patients' health-related quality of life. In intention-to-treat analyses, there were no significant differences in the outcomes with prolonged antibiotic treatment as compared with placebo. Among the seropositive patients who were treated with antibiotics, there was improvement in the score on the physical-component summary scale of the SF-36, the mental-component summary scale, or both in 37 percent, no change in 29 percent, and worsening in 34 percent; among seropositive patients receiving placebo, there was improvement in 40 percent, no change in 26 percent, and worsening in 34 percent (P=0.96 for the comparison between treatment groups). The results were similar for the seronegative patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable impairment of health-related quality of life among patients with persistent symptoms despite previous antibiotic treatment for acute Lyme disease. However, in these two trials, treatment with intravenous and oral antibiotics for 90 days did not improve symptoms more than placebo.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

Proteinuria as a modifiable risk factor for the progression of non-diabetic renal disease.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduce urine protein excretion and slow the progression of renal disease. The beneficial effect in slowing the progression of renal disease is greater in patients with higher urine protein excretion at the onset of treatment. We hypothesized that the greater beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors on the progression of renal disease in patients with higher baseline levels of proteinuria is due to their greater antiproteinuric effect in these patients. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 1860 patients enrolled in 11 randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of antihypertensive regimens, including ACE inhibitors to regimens not including ACE inhibitors on the progression of non-diabetic renal disease. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between the level of proteinuria at baseline and changes in urine protein excretion during follow-up. The Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to assess the relationship between changes in urine protein excretion during follow-up and the effect of ACE inhibitors on the time to doubling of baseline serum creatinine values or onset of end-stage renal disease. RESULTS: Mean (median) baseline urine protein excretion was 1.8 (0.94) g/day. Patients with higher baseline urine protein excretion values had a greater reduction in proteinuria during the follow-up in association with treatment with ACE inhibitors and in association with lowering systolic and diastolic blood pressures (interaction P < 0.001 for all). A higher level of urine protein excretion during follow-up (baseline minus change) was associated with a greater risk of progression [relative risk 5.56 (3.87 to 7.98) for each 1.0 g/day higher protein excretion]. After controlling for the current level of urine protein excretion, the beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors remained significant [relative risk for ACE inhibitors vs. control was 0.66 (0.52 to 0.83)], but there was no significant interaction between the beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors and the baseline level of urine protein excretion. CONCLUSIONS: The antiproteinuric effects of ACE inhibitors and lowering blood pressure are greater in patients with a higher baseline urine protein excretion. The greater beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors on renal disease progression in patients with higher baseline proteinuria can be explained by their greater antiproteinuric effects in these patients. The current level of urine protein excretion is a modifiable risk factor for the progression of non-diabetic renal disease. ACE inhibitors provide greater beneficial effect at all levels of current urine protein excretion.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗
PubMed2001

Using Bayesian inference to perform meta-analysis.

Bayesian modeling offers an elegant approach to meta-analysis that efficiently incorporates all sources of variability and relevant quantifiable external information. It provides a more informative summary of the likely value of parameters after observing the data than do non-Bayesian approaches. This leads to direct probabilistic inference about model parameters such as the average treatment effect, the between-study variance, and individual study treatment effects. The latter are weighted averages of the common mean and individual study means with weights reflecting the amount of information provided by each study relative to the others. Homogeneity among these posterior study estimates indicates that pooling these studies is appropriate; heterogeneity suggests that some cause of between-study variation should be explored. The author describes the construction of such models and shows how to use them to estimate a common mean and regression slopes. Two examples illustrate the additional inferences available with the Bayesian methodology.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors↗
PubMed2000

Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses.

For meta-analysis, substantial uncertainty remains about the most appropriate statistical methods for combining the results of separate trials. An important issue for meta-analysis is how to incorporate heterogeneity, defined as variation among the results of individual trials beyond that expected from chance, into summary estimates of treatment effect. Another consideration is which 'metric' to use to measure treatment effect; for trials with binary outcomes, there are several possible metrics, including the odds ratio (a relative measure) and risk difference (an absolute measure). To examine empirically how assessment of treatment effect and heterogeneity may differ when different methods are utilized, we studied 125 meta-analyses representative of those performed by clinical investigators. There was no meta-analysis in which the summary risk difference and odds ratio were discrepant to the extent that one indicated significant benefit while the other indicated significant harm. Further, for most meta-analyses, summary odds ratios and risk differences agreed in statistical significance, leading to similar conclusions about whether treatments affected outcome. Heterogeneity was common regardless of whether treatment effects were measured by odds ratios or risk differences. However, risk differences usually displayed more heterogeneity than odds ratios. Random effects estimates, which incorporate heterogeneity, tended to be less precisely estimated than fixed effects estimates. We present two exceptions to these observations, which derive from the weights assigned to individual trial estimates. We discuss the implications of these findings for selection of a metric for meta-analysis and incorporation of heterogeneity into summary estimates. Published in 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Bias↗
PubMed2000

Meta-analysis in hematology and oncology.

In 1992, a review article about meta-analysis identified only 15 meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials of cancer therapy. Since then, the total number of meta-analyses in this field has increased almost sixfold. More importantly, the number of randomized, controlled trials in this discipline has also grown tremendously. The expansion in the literature will provide a fertile ground for future meta-analyses. The quality of the recent publications has also improved. An ongoing world-wide effort, the Cochrane Collaboration, is systematically assembling and synthesizing several hundred thousand randomized, controlled trials to improve the delivery of health care. Meta-analysis has many important advantages. It allows the viewing of the complete picture of the evidence. The advent of meta-analysis has sensitized researchers to issues of quality and has improved methodology in clinical research. Detection and explanation of bias and heterogeneity are prime objectives of meta-analysis in clinical research. An array of methods has been developed that allows a better understanding of bias and heterogeneity, beyond simple averaging of results from diverse studies. Meta-analyses of individual patient data, in particular, may promote the development of international collaborations. Several examples of their application are already available in oncology. Meta-analysis may point out deficiencies in the study design of past and current studies, suggest the need for new studies, and inform researchers about the size and design of these studies. In the end, meta-analysis helps to integrate evidence and make recommendations for medical care and medical practice.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2000

Cytomegalovirus immune globulin after liver transplantation: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune globulin (CMVIG) has been shown to significantly reduce severe CMV-associated disease complicating orthotopic liver transplant (OLT). We evaluated the economic impact of severe CMV-associated disease and calculated the marginal cost-effectiveness (C/E) of routine prophylaxis with CMVIG after OLT. DESIGN: C/E analysis. SETTING: Four teaching hospitals in Boston. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent OLT from January 1988 through June 1990. MEASUREMENTS: We gathered actual cost data of hospital care for patients enrolled in a clinical trial of CMVIG prophylaxis in OLT. We calculated average outpatient expenses from a separate group of patients undergoing OLT and developed a regression model to estimate costs during the first year post-transplant (R2 = 0.77). Based on this model, we calculated variable costs (in 1999 US dollars) for all patients in the randomized trial. From the published literature we obtained the probability of CMV outcomes and of long-term survival after OLT. We then developed a decision analytical model to determine an incremental C/E ratio, using a Markov simulation to estimate long-term survival and long-term costs. We discounted costs and life-years at 3% and 5% per yr. RESULTS: Based on the efficacy rate of 54% in the controlled trial, we estimate that CMVIG will increase life expectancy by 0.65 discounted years at an additional cost of $11,600, providing a marginal C/E ratio of $17,900/yr life saved. Examining the confidence limits of efficacy, we estimate that CMVIG will have a marginal C/E ratio of $66,200 gained/yr at an efficacy of 11% and $14,000 gained/yr at an efficacy of 83%. CONCLUSION: After OLT, prophylactic CMVIG has an incremental C/E ratio comparable to that of other well-accepted medical therapies and should be used routinely in these patients.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed1999

Hepatitis C virus genotype does not affect patient survival among renal transplant candidates. The New England Organ Bank Hepatitis C Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are at increased risk for infection with different hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes and multiple genotype infections. However, to date, the effect of the type and number of infecting HCV genotypes on survival among ESRD patients has not been carefully examined, and this was the objective of this study. METHODS: Sera from patients on the renal transplant waiting list at the New England Organ Bank between November 1986 and June 1990 were tested for anti-HCV using a third-generation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. All anti-HCV-positive serum samples were tested for HCV RNA by reverse transcriptase "nested" polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with primers derived from the highly conserved 5'UTR region of the HCV genome. HCV genotypes were determined by restriction fragment length polymorphism of the 5'UTR PCR product. The duration of follow-up was calculated from the date of the first available serum specimen until death, loss to follow-up, or December 31, 1995, whichever occurred earlier. Two separate multivariate models were constructed: one to examine the impact of HCV genotype on mortality and the other to examine the impact of the single versus mixed infection on mortality. In both models, the independent variables were HCV genotype and transplantation. The HCV genotype was treated as a time-independent (baseline) variable. Transplantation was treated as a time-dependent variable in which the status changed after transplantation. RESULTS: HCV RNA was detected by PCR in 224 patients (81%) in whom sera were available. Complete clinical data on baseline covariates, subsequent transplantation, and mortality were available in 180 patients (80%), and these patients constituted the final study cohort. HCV genotypes 1a and 1b were the two most common genotypes encountered and were found in 60 and 24% of the patients, respectively. One hundred and sixty-two (90%) patients were infected with a single HCV single genotype, 16 patients (9%) with two genotypes, and two patients (1%) with three genotypes. Among the 180 patients in the final study cohort, 86 (48%) underwent transplantation, and 66 (37%) patients died during follow-up. Compared with patients infected with HCV genotype 1a, the relative risk (RR) of death from all causes was not significantly increased among patients infected with genotype 1b (RR = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.89) or other genotypes (RR = 1.08, 95% CI, 0.50 to 2.30). Likewise, compared with patients with a single infection, the RR of death among patients with mixed infection (RR = 1.18, 95% CI, 0.52 to 2.66) was not significantly increased. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the type and number of HCV genotypes may not have a significant impact on survival among ESRD patients.

Cohort Studies↗
PubMed1999

Early infection in bone marrow transplantation: quantitative study of clinical factors that affect risk.

Infections remain common life-threatening complications of bone marrow transplantation. To examine clinical factors that affect infection risk, we retrospectively studied patients who received bone marrow transplants (53 autologous and 51 allogeneic). Over a median of 27 hospital days, 44 patients developed documented infections. Both autologous transplantation and hematopoietic growth factor use were associated with less prolonged neutropenia and decreased occurrence of infection (P < or = .05). In a survival regression model, variables independently associated with infection risk were the log10 of the neutrophil count (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.75), ciprofloxacin prophylaxis (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.95), empirical intravenous antibiotic use (HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.03-0.32), and an interaction between neutrophil count and intravenous antibiotic use (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.06-3.29). In this model, infection risk increases steeply at low neutrophil counts for patients receiving no antibiotic therapy. Ciprofloxacin prophylaxis and particularly intravenous antibiotic therapy provide substantial protection at low neutrophil counts. These results can be used to model management strategies for transplant recipients.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Omeprazole plus antibiotics in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection: a meta-regression analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

This article presents a meta-regression analysis of published studies of omeprazole plus antibiotics (amoxicillin, clarithromycin, or an imidazole derivative) in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori. Eligible studies were all randomized, controlled trials published through April 1996 with 10 or more patients receiving omeprazole plus antibiotics for 5 or more days and testing for H. pylori eradication 4 weeks or more after treatment. Probability of eradication was calculated for each treatment arm, and logistic regression was performed using study characteristics as covariates. Seventy-four studies involving 117 treatment arms with 4,769 patients were identified. The eradication rate was 76% for omeprazole plus clarithromycin and 65% for omeprazole plus amoxicillin dual regimens (P <.0001). Eradication rates for triple regimens were 82%, omeprazole plus amoxicillin plus clarithromycin; 83%, omeprazole plus amoxicillin plus imidazole; and 89%, omeprazole plus clarithromycin plus imidazole. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, significant factors were antibiotic, disease, omeprazole dose, and whether treatment was followed by maintenance omeprazole. A systematic overview of the best available evidence suggests that dual therapy with omeprazole plus clarithromycin is superior to omeprazole plus amoxicillin. Triple therapy is better than dual therapy. Treatment works better on ulcers than on nonulcer dyspepsia. Higher doses of omeprazole give better results. Additional trials exploring higher omeprazole doses for varying durations as well as cost, side effects, and compliance trade-offs with efficacy are recommended.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1999

Safety of nifedipine in angina pectoris: a meta-analysis.

-Our objective was to compare cardiovascular event rates in patients with stable angina receiving nifedipine as monotherapy or combination therapy and in active drug controls. A MEDLARS search of published articles from 1966 to 1995 in English, French, German, Italian, or Spanish, supplemented by a manual search of bibliographies, identified 60 randomized controlled trials that met protocol criteria. Blinded articles were extracted by 2 physicians. The pooled risks of death, withdrawal, and cardiovascular event were computed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) for all nifedipine formulations and relative to same study control drug regimens. Thirty cardiovascular events were reported in 2635 nifedipine exposures (1.14%) and 19 events in 2655 other active drug exposures (0.72%). Unadjusted ORs for nifedipine versus controls were 1.40 (95% CI, 0.56 to 3.49) for major events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization procedure), 1.75 (95% CI, 0.83 to 3.67) for increased angina, and 1.61 (95% CI, 0.91 to 2.87) for all events (major events plus increased angina). Episodes of increased angina were more frequent on immediate-release nifedipine (OR, 4.19 [95% CI, 1.41 to 12.49]) and on nifedipine monotherapy (OR, 2.61 [95% CI, 1.30 to 5.26]). The OR for immediate-release nifedipine was significantly higher than that for sustained-release/extended-release nifedipine (P=0.001), and the OR for nifedipine monotherapy was higher than that for nifedipine combination therapy (P=0.03). Increased risks of cardiovascular events in patients with stable angina on nifedipine were due primarily to more episodes of increased angina, confined to the immediate-release formulation and to nifedipine monotherapy.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1998

An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials.

If the control rate (CR) in a clinical trial represents the incidence or the baseline severity of illness in the study population, the size of treatment effects may tend to very with the size of control rates. To investigate this hypothesis, we examined 115 meta-analyses covering a wide range of medical applications for evidence of a linear relationship between the CR and three treatment effect (TE) measures: the risk difference (RD); the log relative risk (RR), and the log odds ratio (OR). We used a hierarchical model that estimates the true regression while accounting for the random error in the measurement of and the functional dependence between the observed TE and the CR. Using a two standard error rule of significance, we found the control rate was about two times more likely to be significantly related to the RD (31 per cent) than to the RR (13 per cent) or the OR (14 per cent). Correlations between TE and CR were more likely when the meta-analysis included 10 or more trials and if patient follow-up was less than six months and homogeneous. Use of weighted linear regression (WLR) of the observed TE on the observed CR instead of the hierarchical model underestimated standard errors and overestimated the number of significant results by a factor of two. The significant correlation between the CR and the TE suggests that, rather than merely pooling the TE into a single summary estimate, investigators should search for the causes of heterogeneity related to patient characteristics and treatment protocols to determine when treatment is most beneficial and that they should plan to study this heterogeneity in clinical trials.

Humans↗
PubMed1998

Vaccination against Lyme disease with recombinant Borrelia burgdorferi outer-surface lipoprotein A with adjuvant. Lyme Disease Vaccine Study Group.

BACKGROUND: The risk of acquiring Lyme disease is high in areas in which the disease is endemic, and the development of a safe and effective vaccine is therefore important. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial involving 10,936 subjects who lived in areas of the United States in which Lyme disease is endemic. Participants received an injection of either recombinant Borrelia burgdorferi outer-surface lipoprotein A (OspA) with adjuvant or placebo at enrollment and 1 and 12 months later. In cases of suspected Lyme disease, culture of skin lesions, polymerase-chain-reaction testing, or serologic testing was done. Serologic testing was performed 12 and 20 months after study entry to detect asymptomatic infections. RESULTS: In the first year, after two injections, 22 subjects in the vaccine group and 43 in the placebo group contracted definite Lyme disease (P=0.009); vaccine efficacy was 49 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 15 to 69 percent). In the second year, after the third injection, 16 vaccine recipients and 66 placebo recipients contracted definite Lyme disease (P<0.001); vaccine efficacy was 76 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 58 to 86 percent). The efficacy of the vaccine in preventing asymptomatic infection was 83 percent in the first year and 100 percent in the second year. Injection of the vaccine was associated with mild-to-moderate local or systemic reactions lasting a median of three days. CONCLUSIONS: Three injections of vaccine prevented most definite cases of Lyme disease or asymptomatic B. burgdorferi infection.

Adjuvants, Immunologic↗