SAGAcités towards a management aided system for integrating outdoor climate into the design of urban spaces

Actes de la conférence internationale, Toulouse, 2002International audienc

SAGAcités towards a management aided system for integrating outdoor climate into the design of urban spaces

Actes de la conférence internationale, Toulouse, 2002International audienc

Impact of methodological choices in comparative effectiveness studies: application in natalizumab versus fingolimod comparison among patients with multiple sclerosis

Abstract Background Natalizumab and fingolimod are used as high-efficacy treatments in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Several observational studies comparing these two drugs have shown variable results, using different methods to control treatment indication bias and manage censoring. The objective of this empirical study was to elucidate the impact of methods of causal inference on the results of comparative effectiveness studies. Methods Data from three observational multiple sclerosis registries (MSBase, the Danish MS Registry and French OFSEP registry) were combined. Four clinical outcomes were studied. Propensity scores were used to match or weigh the compared groups, allowing for estimating average treatment effect for treated or average treatment effect for the entire population. Analyses were conducted both in intention-to-treat and per-protocol frameworks. The impact of the positivity assumption was also assessed. Results Overall, 5,148 relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients were included. In this well-powered sample, the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates overlapped widely. Propensity scores weighting and propensity scores matching procedures led to consistent results. Some differences were observed between average treatment effect for the entire population and average treatment effect for treated estimates. Intention-to-treat analyses were more conservative than per-protocol analyses. The most pronounced irregularities in outcomes and propensity scores were introduced by violation of the positivity assumption. Conclusions This applied study elucidates the influence of methodological decisions on the results of comparative effectiveness studies of treatments for multiple sclerosis. According to our results, there are no material differences between conclusions obtained with propensity scores matching or propensity scores weighting given that a study is sufficiently powered, models are correctly specified and positivity assumption is fulfilled

Impact of methodological choices in comparative effectiveness studies: application in natalizumab versus fingolimod comparison among patients with multiple sclerosis

Abstract Background Natalizumab and fingolimod are used as high-efficacy treatments in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Several observational studies comparing these two drugs have shown variable results, using different methods to control treatment indication bias and manage censoring. The objective of this empirical study was to elucidate the impact of methods of causal inference on the results of comparative effectiveness studies. Methods Data from three observational multiple sclerosis registries (MSBase, the Danish MS Registry and French OFSEP registry) were combined. Four clinical outcomes were studied. Propensity scores were used to match or weigh the compared groups, allowing for estimating average treatment effect for treated or average treatment effect for the entire population. Analyses were conducted both in intention-to-treat and per-protocol frameworks. The impact of the positivity assumption was also assessed. Results Overall, 5,148 relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients were included. In this well-powered sample, the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates overlapped widely. Propensity scores weighting and propensity scores matching procedures led to consistent results. Some differences were observed between average treatment effect for the entire population and average treatment effect for treated estimates. Intention-to-treat analyses were more conservative than per-protocol analyses. The most pronounced irregularities in outcomes and propensity scores were introduced by violation of the positivity assumption. Conclusions This applied study elucidates the influence of methodological decisions on the results of comparative effectiveness studies of treatments for multiple sclerosis. According to our results, there are no material differences between conclusions obtained with propensity scores matching or propensity scores weighting given that a study is sufficiently powered, models are correctly specified and positivity assumption is fulfilled

Linseed essential oil - source of lipids as active ingredients for pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals

Linseed - also known as flaxseed - is known for its beneficial effects on animal health attributed to its composition. Linseed comprises linoleic and ?-linolenic fatty acids, various dietary fibers and lignans, which are beneficial to health because they reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases, as well as cancer, decreasing the levels of cholesterol and relaxing the smooth muscle cells in arteries increasing the blood flow. Essential fatty acids from flax participate in several metabolic processes of the cell, not only as structuring components of the cell membrane but also as storage lipids. Flax, being considered a functional food, can be consumed in a variety of ways, including seeds, oil or flour, contributing to basic nutrition. Several formulations containing flax are available on the market in the form of e.g. capsules and microencapsulated powders having potential as nutraceuticals. This paper revises the different lipid classes found in flaxseeds and their genomics. It also discusses the beneficial effects of flax and flaxseed oil and their biological advantages as ingredients in pharmaceuticals and in nutraceuticals products.The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support from the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Science and Education (FCT/MEC) through national funds, and co-financed by FEDER, under the Partnership Agreement PT2020 for the project M-ERA-NET/0004/2015-PAIRED.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio