Advisory Committee

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 47916 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Bethany Tennant - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Clara D Bloomfield - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the world health organization classification of hematological malignancies report of the clinical Advisory Committee meeting airlie house virginia november 1997
    Modern Pathology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Nancy Lee Harris, Elaine S Jaffe, J Diebold, G Flandrin, Konrad H Mullerhermelink, James W Vardiman, Andrew T Lister, Clara D Bloomfield
    Abstract:

    Since 1995, the European Association of Pathologists and the Society for Hematopathology have been developing a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematologic malignancies. The classification includes lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic, and mast cell neoplasms. The WHO project involves 10 Committees of pathologists, who have developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A Clinical Advisory Committee of international hematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification will be useful to clinicians. A meeting was held in November 1997 to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. The WHO has adopted the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms, published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group, as the classification of lymphoid neoplasms. This approach to classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of “real” disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features, and clinical features. The relative importance of each of these features varies among diseases, and there is no one “gold standard.” The WHO classification has applied the principles of the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms to myeloid and histiocytic neoplasms. The classification of myeloid neoplasms recognizes distinct entities defined by a combination of morphology and cytogenetic abnormalities. The Clinical Advisory Committee meeting, which was organized around a series of clinical questions, was able to reach a consensus on most of the questions posed. The questions and the consensus are discussed in detail in this article. Among other things, the Clinical Advisory Committee concluded that clinical grouping of lymphoid neoplasms was neither necessary nor desirable. Patient treatment is determined by the specific type of lymphoma, with the addition of grade within the tumor type, if applicable, and clinical prognostic factors such as the international prognostic index. The experience of developing the WHO classification has produced a new and exciting degree of cooperation and communication between oncologists and pathologists from around the world. This should facilitate progress in the understanding and treatment of hematologic malignancies.

  • world health organization classification of neoplastic diseases of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues report of the clinical Advisory Committee meeting airlie house virginia november 1997
    Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
    Co-Authors: Nancy Lee Harris, Elaine S Jaffe, J Diebold, G Flandrin, Konrad H Mullerhermelink, James W Vardiman, Andrew T Lister, Clara D Bloomfield
    Abstract:

    PURPOSE: The European Association of Hematopathologists and the Society for Hematopathology have developed a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematologic malignancies, including lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic, and mast cell neoplasms. DESIGN: Ten Committees of pathologists developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A clinical Advisory Committee (CAC) of international hematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification would be useful to clinicians. The CAC met in November 1997 to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. RESULTS: The WHO uses the Revised European-American Lymphoma (REAL) classification, published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group, to categorize lymphoid neoplasms. The REAL classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of “real” disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features, and clinical features. The relative importance of ea...

Michael R Green - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • ten years of donor derived disease a report of the disease transmission Advisory Committee
    American Journal of Transplantation, 2021
    Co-Authors: Daniel R Kaul, Michael G. Ison, Emily A. Blumberg, Michael R Green, Gabe Vece, Ricardo M La Hoz, Timothy L Pruett, Michael A Nalesnik, Susan Tlusty, Amber R Wilk
    Abstract:

    Despite clinical and laboratory screening of potential donors for transmissible disease, unexpected transmission of disease from donor to recipient remains an inherent risk of organ transplantation. The Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC) was created to review and classify reports of potential disease transmission and use this information to inform national policy and improve patient safety. From January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017, the DTAC received 2185 reports; 335 (15%) were classified as a proven/probable donor transmission event. Infections were transmitted most commonly (67%), followed by malignancies (29%), and other disease processes (6%). Forty-six percent of recipients receiving organs from a donor that transmitted disease to at least 1 recipient developed a donor-derived disease (DDD). Sixty-seven percent of recipients developed symptoms of DDD within 30 days of transplantation, and all bacterial infections were recognized within 45 days. Graft loss or death occurred in about one third of recipients with DDD, with higher rates associated with malignancy transmission and parasitic and fungal diseases. Unexpected DDD was rare, occurring in 0.18% of all transplant recipients. These findings will help focus future efforts to recognize and prevent DDD.

  • coccidioidomycosis transmission through organ transplantation a report of the optn ad hoc disease transmission Advisory Committee
    American Journal of Transplantation, 2016
    Co-Authors: Shimon Kusne, Emily A. Blumberg, S Covington, Sarah E Taranto, Cameron R Wolfe, Daniel R Kaul, Michael R Green
    Abstract:

    Donor-derived coccidioidomycosis has caused unexpected morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients. All proven or probable reports of donor-derived coccidioidomycosis to the Disease Transmission Advisory Committee between 2005 and August 2012 were reviewed. Six reports of proven or probable coccidioidomycosis were discovered. In four of six, the infection was first detected at autopsy in the recipient. In two cases it was first identified in the donor. Twenty-one recipients received organs from these six donors. Transmission occurred in 43% at a median of 30 days posttransplant with a mortality rate of 28.5%. Eleven recipients received preemptive antifungals, seven did not receive treatment, and treatment information was not reported for three recipients. Five of seven who did not receive prophylaxis/treatment died and all 11 who received early therapy survived. Six deaths occurred 14 to 55 days after transplant, with a median of 21 days. For exposed recipients, donor-derived coccidioidomycosis is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Evidence of infection in one recipient should prompt immediate evaluation for treatment of all other recipients from the same donor as preemptive treatment was effective. Further studies are needed to decide whether all donors from endemic areas should have routine serologic screening.

  • donor derived transmission events in 2013 a report of the organ procurement transplant network ad hoc disease transmission Advisory Committee
    Transplantation, 2015
    Co-Authors: Michael R Green, S Covington, Sarah E Taranto, Cameron R Wolfe, Walter C Bell, Scott W Biggins, David J Conti, David G Destefano, Edward A Dominguez, Donna Ennis
    Abstract:

    BackgroundThe Organ Procurement Transplant Network Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC), a multidisciplinary Committee, evaluates potential donor-derived transmission events (PDDTE), including infections and malignancies, to assess for donor transmitted events.MethodsReports of unexpected

Carolyn B Bridges - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Advisory Committee on immunization practices recommended immunization schedule for adults aged 19 years or older united states 2016
    Annals of Internal Medicine, 2016
    Co-Authors: David K Kim, Carolyn B Bridges, Kathleen Harriman
    Abstract:

    The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) presents the recommended Immunization Schedule for Adults Aged 19 Years or Older for 2016. This schedule has been approved by the ACIP, Ameri...

  • Advisory Committee on immunization practices recommended immunization schedule for adults aged 19 years or older united states 2015
    Annals of Internal Medicine, 2015
    Co-Authors: David K Kim, Carolyn B Bridges, Kathleen H Harriman
    Abstract:

    The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) presents the 2015 recommended immunization schedule for adults. This schedule has been approved by the ACIP, American College of Physicians, ...

  • influenza vaccination of health care personnel recommendations of the healthcare infection control practices Advisory Committee hicpac and the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip
    Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2006
    Co-Authors: Michele L Pearson, Carolyn B Bridges, Scott A Harper
    Abstract:

    Summary This report summarizes recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning influenza vaccination of health-care personnel (HCP) in the United States. These recommendations apply to HCP in acute care hospitals, nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, physician's offices, urgent care centers, and outpatient clinics, and to persons who provide home health care and emergency medical services. The recommendations are targeted at health-care facility administrators, infection-control professionals, and occupational health professionals responsible for influenza vaccination programs and influenza infection-control programs in their institutions. HICPAC and ACIP recommend that all HCP be vaccinated annually against influenza. Facilities that employ HCP are strongly encouraged to provide vaccine to their staff by using evidence-based approaches that maximize vaccination rates.

  • prevention and control of influenza recommendations of the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip
    Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2004
    Co-Authors: Scott A Harper, Keiji Fukuda, Timothy M Uyeki, Nancy J Cox, Carolyn B Bridges
    Abstract:

    This report updates the 2002 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and Control of Influenza: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2002;51 [No. RR-3]:1-31). The 2003 recommendations include new or updated information regarding 1) the timing of influenza vaccination by age and risk group; 2) influenza vaccine for children aged 6-23 months; 3) the 2003-2004 trivalent inactivated vaccine virus strains: A/Moscow/10/99 (H3N2)-like, A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1)-like, and B/Hong Kong/330/2001-like antigens (for the A/Moscow/10/99 [H3N2]-like antigen, manufacturers will use the antigenically equivalent A/Panama/2007/99 [H3N2] virus, and for the B/Hong Kong/330/2001-like antigen, manufacturers will use either B/Hong Kong/330/2001 or the antigenically equivalent B/Hong Kong/1434/2002); 4) availability of certain influenza vaccine doses with reduced thimerosal content, including single 0.25 mL-dose syringes; and 5) manufacturers of influenza vaccine for the U.S. market. Although the optimal time to vaccinate against influenza is October and November, vaccination in December and later continues to be strongly recommended A link to this report and other information regarding influenza can be accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/flu/fluvirus.htm.

  • prevention and control of influenza recommendations of the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip
    Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2004
    Co-Authors: Scott A Harper, Keiji Fukuda, Timothy M Uyeki, Carolyn B Bridges
    Abstract:

    This report updates the 2006 recommendations by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2006;55[No. RR-10]). The groups of persons for whom vaccination is recommended and the antiviral medications recommended for chemoprophylaxis or treatment (oseltamivir or zanamivir) have not changed. Estimated vaccination coverage remains or =6 weeks) or trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (doses separated by > or =4 weeks), with single annual doses in subsequent years; 2) recommending that children aged 6 months--8 years who received only 1 dose in their first year of vaccination receive 2 doses the following year, with single annual doses in subsequent years; 3) highlighting a previous recommendation that all persons, including school-aged children, who want to reduce the risk of becoming ill with influenza or of transmitting influenza to others should be vaccinated; 4) emphasizing that immunization providers should offer influenza vaccine and schedule immunization clinics throughout the influenza season; 5) recommending that health-care facilities consider the level of vaccination coverage among HCP to be one measure of a patient safety quality program and implement policies to encourage HCP vaccination (e.g., obtaining signed statements from HCP who decline influenza vaccination); and 6) using the 2007--2008 trivalent vaccine virus strains A/Solomon Islands/3/2006 (H1N1)-like (new for this season), A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2)-like, and B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like antigens. This report and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (http://www.cdc.gov/flu). Updates or supplements to these recommendations (e.g., expanded age or risk group indications for currently licensed vaccines) might be required. Immunization providers should be alert to announcements of recommendation updates and should check the CDC influenza website periodically for additional information.

Karen R Broder - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • use of combination measles mumps rubella and varicella vaccine recommendations of the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip
    MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports Centers for Disease Control, 2010
    Co-Authors: Mona Marin, Karen R Broder, Jonathan L Temte, Dixie E Snider, Jane F Seward
    Abstract:

    This report presents new recommendations adopted in June 2009 by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding use of the combination measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine (MMRV, ProQuad, Merck & Co., Inc.). MMRV vaccine was licensed in the United States in September 2005 and may be used instead of measles, mumps, rubella vaccine (MMR, M-M-RII, Merck & Co., Inc.) and varicella vaccine (VARIVAX, Merck & Co., Inc.) to implement the recommended 2-dose vaccine schedule for prevention of measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella among children aged 12 months-12 years. At the time of its licensure, use of MMRV vaccine was preferred for both the first and second doses over separate injections of equivalent component vaccines (MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine), which was consistent with ACIP's 2006 general recommendations on use of combination vaccines (CDC. General recommendations on immunization: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2006;55;[No. RR-15]). Since July 2007, supplies of MMRV vaccine have been temporarily unavailable as a result of manufacturing constraints unrelated to efficacy or safety. MMRV vaccine is expected to be available again in the United States in May 2010. In February 2008, on the basis of preliminary data from two studies conducted postlicensure that suggested an increased risk for febrile seizures 5-12 days after vaccination among children aged 12-23 months who had received the first dose of MMRV vaccine compared with children the same age who had received the first dose of MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine administered as separate injections at the same visit, ACIP issued updated recommendations regarding MMRV vaccine use (CDC. Update: recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP] regarding administration of combination MMRV vaccine. MMWR 2008;57:258-60). These updated recommendations expressed no preference for use of MMRV vaccine over separate injections of equivalent component vaccines for both the first and second doses. The final results of the two postlicensure studies indicated that among children aged 12--23 months, one additional febrile seizure occurred 5-12 days after vaccination per 2,300-2,600 children who had received the first dose of MMRV vaccine compared with children who had received the first dose of MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine administered as separate injections at the same visit. Data from postlicensure studies do not suggest that children aged 4--6 years who received the second dose of MMRV vaccine had an increased risk for febrile seizures after vaccination compared with children the same age who received MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine administered as separate injections at the same visit. In June 2009, after consideration of the postlicensure data and other evidence, ACIP adopted new recommendations regarding use of MMRV vaccine for the first and second doses and identified a personal or family (i.e., sibling or parent) history of seizure as a precaution for use of MMRV vaccine. For the first dose of measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccines at age 12--47 months, either MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine or MMRV vaccine may be used. Providers who are considering administering MMRV vaccine should discuss the benefits and risks of both vaccination options with the parents or caregivers. Unless the parent or caregiver expresses a preference for MMRV vaccine, CDC recommends that MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine should be administered for the first dose in this age group. For the second dose of measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccines at any age (15 months-12 years) and for the first dose at age >or=48 months, use of MMRV vaccine generally is preferred over separate injections of its equivalent component vaccines (i.e., MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine). This recommendation is consistent with ACIP's 2009 provisional general recommendations regarding use of combination vaccines (available at http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/provisional/downloads/combo-vax-Aug2009-508.pdf), which state that use of a combination vaccine generally is preferred over its equivalent component vaccines.

  • prevention and control of seasonal influenza with vaccines recommendations of the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip 2009
    MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports Centers for Disease Control, 2009
    Co-Authors: Anthony E Fiore, Karen R Broder, Timothy M Uyeki, Joseph S Bresee, David K Shay, John K Iskander, Gina T Mootrey, Nancy J Cox
    Abstract:

    This report updates the 2008 recommendations by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2008;57[No. RR-7]). Information on vaccination issues related to the recently identified novel influenza A H1N1 virus will be published later in 2009. The 2009 seasonal influenza recommendations include new and updated information. Highlights of the 2009 recommendations include 1) a recommendation that annual vaccination be administered to all children aged 6 months-18 years for the 2009-10 influenza season; 2) a recommendation that vaccines containing the 2009-10 trivalent vaccine virus strains A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1)-like, A/Brisbane/10/2007 (H3N2)-like, and B/Brisbane/60/2008-like antigens be used; and 3) a notice that recommendations for influenza diagnosis and antiviral use will be published before the start of the 2009-10 influenza season. Vaccination efforts should begin as soon as vaccine is available and continue through the influenza season. Approximately 83% of the United States population is specifically recommended for annual vaccination against seasonal influenza; however, <40% of the U.S. population received the 2008-09 influenza vaccine. These recommendations also include a summary of safety data for U.S. licensed influenza vaccines. These recommendations and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (http://www.cdc.gov/flu); any updates or supplements that might be required during the 2009-10 influenza season also can be found at this website. Vaccination and health-care providers should be alert to announcements of recommendation updates and should check the CDC influenza website periodically for additional information.

  • preventing tetanus diphtheria and pertussis among adults use of tetanus toxoid reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine recommendations of the Advisory Committee on immunization practices acip and recommendation of acip supported by the healthcare infection control practices Advisory Committee hicpac for use of tdap among health care personnel
    MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports Centers for Disease Control, 2006
    Co-Authors: K Kretsinger, Karen R Broder, Grace M Lee, Ismael R Ortegasanchez, M M Cortese, M P Joyce, T Tiwari, A C Cohn, Barbara A Slade, J K Iskander
    Abstract:

    On June 10, 2005, a tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) formulated for use in adults and adolescents was licensed in the United States for persons aged 11-64 years (ADACEL, manufactured by sanofi pasteur, Toronto, Ontario, Canada). Prelicensure studies demonstrated safety and efficacy, inferred through immunogenicity, against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis when Tdap was administered as a single booster dose to adults. To reduce pertussis morbidity among adults and maintain the standard of care for tetanus and diphtheria prevention and to reduce the transmission of pertussis to infants and in health-care settings, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that: 1) adults aged 19-64 years should receive a single dose of Tdap to replace tetanus and diphtheria toxoids vaccine (Td) for booster immunization against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis if they received their last dose of Td >or=10 years earlier and they have not previously received Tdap; 2) intervals shorter than 10 years since the last Td may be used for booster protection against pertussis; 3) adults who have or who anticipate having close contact with an infant aged <12 months (e.g., parents, grandparents aged <65 years, child-care providers, and health-care personnel) should receive a single dose of Tdap to reduce the risk for transmitting pertussis. An interval as short as 2 years from the last Td is suggested; shorter intervals can be used. When possible, women should receive Tdap before becoming pregnant. Women who have not previously received Tdap should receive a dose of Tdap in the immediate postpartum period; 4) health-care personnel who work in hospitals or ambulatory care settings and have direct patient contact should receive a single dose of Tdap as soon as feasible if they have not previously received Tdap. An interval as short as 2 years from the last dose of Td is recommended; shorter intervals may be used. These recommendations for use of Tdap in health-care personnel are supported by the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). This statement 1) reviews pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria vaccination policy in the United States; 2) describes the clinical features and epidemiology of pertussis among adults; 3) summarizes the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety data of Tdap; and 4) presents recommendations for the use of Tdap among adults aged 19-64 years.

Related terms

Advisory Committee - 15 days free trial to Access Experts & Abstracts