Synthesis and identification of artificial complete antigen 25-hydroxyvitamin D_3

目的:合成25-羟基维生素d3人工完全抗原,并制备抗25-羟基维生素d3的特异性抗体。方法:将25-羟基维生素d3进行化学修饰加入羧基活性基团,合成具有半抗原结构特征的25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯。采用碳二亚胺法,将25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯,分别与牛血清白蛋白(bSA)和卵清蛋白(OVA)偶联,合成人工完全抗原25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯-bSA和25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯-OVA。通过紫外吸收光谱,SdS-PAgE和MAldI-TOf进行偶联鉴定。用25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯-bSA免疫小鼠,获得抗25-羟基维生素d3抗体免疫血清。结果:25-羟基维生素d3-半琥珀酸酯与bSA的偶联比为(12±0.16)∶1,免疫小鼠后获得高效价(效价为6.25x10-4)的抗体,且标准品浓度在37.5~600 ng/Ml范围具有显著的竞争性线性关系,检测的灵敏度为37.5 ng/Ml。结论:成功合成了25-羟基维生素d3人工完全抗原,制备出25-羟基维生素d3的抗体且其线性关系显著,灵敏度较高,为进一步研制检测25-羟基维生素d3的试剂盒奠定了基础。AIM: To synthesize the 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 artificial complete antigen and to prepare the specific antibody against 25-hydroxyvitamin D3.METHODS: The active group carboxyl was introduced into 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and formed 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate which possessed the structure of the hapten by chemical modification.The EDC method was applied to conjugate 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate to bovine serum albumin as an artificial immunogen.The coating antigen 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate-OVA was obtained in the same way.Ultraviolet,SDS-PAGE and MALDI-Tof were used to identify 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate-BSA.RESULTS: BALB/c mice were immunized with 25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate-BSA to generate the polyclonal antibody of the 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 worth high titer and the immunogen,25-hydroxyvitamin D3-hemisuccinate-BSA,was successfully prepared with coupling ratio(12±0.16)∶1(N=3) coupling.CONCLUSION: The high titer and good sensitivity of anti-25-hydroxyvitamin D3 antibody are produced in sera immunized BALB/c mice,which made it possible to develop a clinical diagnostics for illness

一种中文门楼址的自适应表达及成分解析方法

文章设计了一种自适应层次化地址表达模式,总结了70种城市门楼址表达模式和9种农村门楼址表达模式;针对门楼址层级的细粒度解析问题,设计了基于规则的字母与模式联合解码的分词方法,实现了中文门楼址成分的分割与标注的同步处理。最后使用我国5个城市不同描述粒度的地址数据验证了该方法的有效性,结果证明可满足大规模数据处理的自适应、高性能和细粒度的解析需求

高效液相体积排阻色谱法测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146s抗原含量及疫苗质量评估

【背景】口蹄疫疫苗质量评价方法对疫苗生产企业和监管部门进行质量控制尤为重要,146S抗原含量是评价口蹄疫疫苗质量的关键指标。蔗糖密度梯度离心法(sucrose density gradient centrifugation, SDGC)是公认经典的测定口蹄疫146S抗原含量的方法,但存在检测耗时长、过程复杂、重复性差等缺点,影响了疫苗的质量监测。口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量高效液相体积排阻色谱法(size-exclusion high-performance liquid chromatography, SE-HPLC)是一种简便、快速、自动化程度高、高效的测定方法。 【目的】在初步建立的采用SE-HPLC测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量方法的基础上,针对不同类型、不同浓缩纯化生产工艺制备的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,进一步确认SE-HPLC法在检测过程中的普适性势在必行。【方法】利用口蹄疫146S抗原标准品建立SE-HPLC法标准曲线,求得回归方程,用于检测样品的146S含量。采用SE-HPLC法和SDGC法分别检测146S抗原标准品1倍、2倍、4倍、8倍、16倍稀释的5个样品和市场上随机选取的22批疫苗,计算146S抗原含量,对比分析两种方法的相关性。用SE-HPLC法,3次重复检测不同企业生产的134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量,通过色谱图特异性、检测值相对标准偏差(relative standard deviation, RSD)分析SE-HPLC法的重复性,评价该方法的适用性,分析市场流通疫苗的总体质量情况。【结果】SE-HPLC法建立的标准曲线,峰面积与146S抗原含量的线性关系良好(R~2=0.9981,n=8)。口蹄疫146S抗原标准品5个稀释样品和22批口蹄疫疫苗的146S抗原含量检测结果表明,口蹄疫146S抗原含量检测SDGC法和SE-HPLC法高度正相关(R_S~2=0.9994,nS=5;R_v~2= 0.9602,nv=22)。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗中,146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD< 5%的疫苗批次分别占疫苗总批次(134批)、单价苗总批次(18批)、双组分及双价苗总批次(76批)、三价苗总批次(40批)的81.34%、72.22%、85.53%、80.00%;146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD≤10%的疫苗批次占疫苗总批次(134批)的97.76%。口蹄疫146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法检测重复性良好,其中疫苗146S抗原含量2—4μg·mL~(-1)时,检测重复性最好。所有批次疫苗均检测到目的峰,目的峰的平均起峰、最高峰、落峰时间分别为SE-HPLC法进样后的11.58、12.90、14.93min,平均持续3.36min。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量为1.11—80.36μg·mL~(-1),其中单价苗、双价苗、双组分苗、三价苗146S抗原含量均值分别为2.07、2.40、 2.85、13.14 μg·mL~(-1)。【结论】口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法适用性好、重复性高、高效、快速、简便,能够用于检测不同类型的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,从而进行疫苗的质量监测和评估。市场流通的口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S含量较高,疫苗质量较好

高效液相体积排阻色谱法测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量及疫苗质量评估

【背景】口蹄疫疫苗质量评价方法对疫苗生产企业和监管部门进行质量控制尤为重要,146S抗原含量是评价口蹄疫疫苗质量的关键指标。蔗糖密度梯度离心法(sucrose density gradient centrifugation,SDGC)是公认经典的测定口蹄疫146S抗原含量的方法,但存在检测耗时长、过程复杂、重复性差等缺点,影响了疫苗的质量监测。口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量高效液相体积排阻色谱法(size-exclusion high-performance liquid chromatography,SE-HPLC)是一种简便、快速、自动化程度高、高效的测定方法。【目的】在初步建立的采用SE-HPLC测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量方法的基础上,针对不同类型、不同浓缩纯化生产工艺制备的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,进一步确认SE-HPLC法在检测过程中的普适性势在必行。【方法】利用口蹄疫146S抗原标准品建立SE-HPLC法标准曲线,求得回归方程,用于检测样品的146S含量。采用SE-HPLC法和SDGC法分别检测146S抗原标准品1倍、2倍、4倍、8倍、16倍稀释的5个样品和市场上随机选取的22批疫苗,计算146S抗原含量,对比分析两种方法的相关性。用SE-HPLC法,3次重复检测不同企业生产的134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量,通过色谱图特异性、检测值相对标准偏差(relative standard deviation,RSD)分析SE-HPLC法的重复性,评价该方法的适用性,分析市场流通疫苗的总体质量情况。【结果】SE-HPLC法建立的标准曲线,峰面积与146S抗原含量的线性关系良好(R^2=0.9981,n=8)。口蹄疫146S抗原标准品5个稀释样品和22批口蹄疫疫苗的146S抗原含量检测结果表明,口蹄疫146S抗原含量检测SDGC法和SE-HPLC法高度正相关(RS^2=0.9994,nS=5;Rv 2=0.9602,nv=22)。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗中,146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD<5%的疫苗批次分别占疫苗总批次(134批)、单价苗总批次(18批)、双组分及双价苗总批次(76批)、三价苗总批次(40批)的81.34%、72.22%、85.53%、80.00%;146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD≤10%的疫苗批次占疫苗总批次(134批)的97.76%。口蹄疫146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法检测重复性良好,其中疫苗146S抗原含量2—4μg·mL^-1时,检测重复性最好。所有批次疫苗均检测到目的峰,目的峰的平均起峰、最高峰、落峰时间分别为SE-HPLC法进样后的11.58、12.90、14.93min,平均持续3.36min。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量为1.11—80.36μg·mL^-1,其中单价苗、双价苗、双组分苗、三价苗146S抗原含量均值分别为2.07、2.40、2.85、13.14μg·mL^-1。【结论】口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法适用性好、重复性高、高效、快速、简便,能够用于检测不同类型的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,从而进行疫苗的质量监测和评估。市场流通的口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S含量较高,疫苗质量较好

高效液相体积排阻色谱法测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146s抗原含量及疫苗质量评估

【背景】口蹄疫疫苗质量评价方法对疫苗生产企业和监管部门进行质量控制尤为重要,146S抗原含量是评价口蹄疫疫苗质量的关键指标。蔗糖密度梯度离心法(sucrose density gradient centrifugation, SDGC)是公认经典的测定口蹄疫146S抗原含量的方法,但存在检测耗时长、过程复杂、重复性差等缺点,影响了疫苗的质量监测。口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量高效液相体积排阻色谱法(size-exclusion high-performance liquid chromatography, SE-HPLC)是一种简便、快速、自动化程度高、高效的测定方法。 【目的】在初步建立的采用SE-HPLC测定口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量方法的基础上,针对不同类型、不同浓缩纯化生产工艺制备的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,进一步确认SE-HPLC法在检测过程中的普适性势在必行。【方法】利用口蹄疫146S抗原标准品建立SE-HPLC法标准曲线,求得回归方程,用于检测样品的146S含量。采用SE-HPLC法和SDGC法分别检测146S抗原标准品1倍、2倍、4倍、8倍、16倍稀释的5个样品和市场上随机选取的22批疫苗,计算146S抗原含量,对比分析两种方法的相关性。用SE-HPLC法,3次重复检测不同企业生产的134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量,通过色谱图特异性、检测值相对标准偏差(relative standard deviation, RSD)分析SE-HPLC法的重复性,评价该方法的适用性,分析市场流通疫苗的总体质量情况。【结果】SE-HPLC法建立的标准曲线,峰面积与146S抗原含量的线性关系良好(R~2=0.9981,n=8)。口蹄疫146S抗原标准品5个稀释样品和22批口蹄疫疫苗的146S抗原含量检测结果表明,口蹄疫146S抗原含量检测SDGC法和SE-HPLC法高度正相关(R_S~2=0.9994,nS=5;R_v~2= 0.9602,nv=22)。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗中,146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD< 5%的疫苗批次分别占疫苗总批次(134批)、单价苗总批次(18批)、双组分及双价苗总批次(76批)、三价苗总批次(40批)的81.34%、72.22%、85.53%、80.00%;146S抗原含量相对标准偏差RSD≤10%的疫苗批次占疫苗总批次(134批)的97.76%。口蹄疫146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法检测重复性良好,其中疫苗146S抗原含量2—4μg·mL~(-1)时,检测重复性最好。所有批次疫苗均检测到目的峰,目的峰的平均起峰、最高峰、落峰时间分别为SE-HPLC法进样后的11.58、12.90、14.93min,平均持续3.36min。134批口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量为1.11—80.36μg·mL~(-1),其中单价苗、双价苗、双组分苗、三价苗146S抗原含量均值分别为2.07、2.40、 2.85、13.14 μg·mL~(-1)。【结论】口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S抗原含量SE-HPLC法适用性好、重复性高、高效、快速、简便,能够用于检测不同类型的口蹄疫灭活疫苗,从而进行疫苗的质量监测和评估。市场流通的口蹄疫灭活疫苗146S含量较高,疫苗质量较好

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials

JUNO Sensitivity on Proton Decay p→νˉK+p\to \bar\nu K^+ Searches

The Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) is a large liquid scintillator detector designed to explore many topics in fundamental physics. In this paper, the potential on searching for proton decay in $p\to \bar\nu K^+$ mode with JUNO is investigated.The kaon and its decay particles feature a clear three-fold coincidence signature that results in a high efficiency for identification. Moreover, the excellent energy resolution of JUNO permits to suppress the sizable background caused by other delayed signals. Based on these advantages, the detection efficiency for the proton decay via $p\to \bar\nu K^+$ is 36.9% with a background level of 0.2 events after 10 years of data taking. The estimated sensitivity based on 200 kton-years exposure is $9.6 \times 10^{33}$ years, competitive with the current best limits on the proton lifetime in this channel

JUNO sensitivity on proton decay p → ν K + searches*

The Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) is a large liquid scintillator detector designed to explore many topics in fundamental physics. In this study, the potential of searching for proton decay in the $p\to \bar{\nu} K^+$ mode with JUNO is investigated. The kaon and its decay particles feature a clear three-fold coincidence signature that results in a high efficiency for identification. Moreover, the excellent energy resolution of JUNO permits suppression of the sizable background caused by other delayed signals. Based on these advantages, the detection efficiency for the proton decay via $p\to \bar{\nu} K^+$ is 36.9% ± 4.9% with a background level of $0.2\pm 0.05({\rm syst})\pm$$0.2({\rm stat})$ events after 10 years of data collection. The estimated sensitivity based on 200 kton-years of exposure is $9.6 \times 10^{33}$ years, which is competitive with the current best limits on the proton lifetime in this channel and complements the use of different detection technologies