Prestress Losses in Lightweight Self-Consolidating Concrete

While much research has been performed on lightweight concrete and self-consolidating concrete (SCC), the knowledge of prestress losses in lightweight self-consolidating concrete (LWSCC) is still limited. LWSCC has the benefits of increased flowability, reduced placement labor, and decreased shipping cost compared to conventional concrete. This research program included the study of 14 SCC beams cast with expanded clay, expanded shale, and limestone aggregates. Strains in the beams were measured with vibrating-wire strain gages, and the measured prestress losses were compared with current AASHTO methods for calculating prestress losses. The AASHTO approximate method better predicted actual losses than did the AASHTO refined method. In addition, the AASHTO approximate method gave more accurate results for the LWSCC beams than it did for the normalweight SCC beams. This research showed that the AASHTO refined method is overly sensitive to the concrete compressive strength and modulus of elasticity at release. The properties associated with the researched concrete mixes were also studied, and their effects on prestress losses are discussed. Companion cylinders were used for compressive strength and modulus of elasticity testing. Shrinkage prisms were also cast. The total prestress losses were greater for the LWSCC which had lower modulus of elasticity than the normalweight SCC. Less shrinkage occurred in the LWSCC mixtures than the SCC due to internal curing

Olanzapine / fluoxetine combination for treatment resistant depression : efficacy and clinical utility

Antidepressant monotherapy is a first-line treatment for depression; however, not all sufferers will adequately respond to treatment. When treating a patient with treatment-resistant depression, the clinician needs to consider all factors which may contribute to an inadequate response to an antidepressant. These include accuracy of diagnosis and medication adherence, as well as the patient&rsquo;s personality, lifestyle, life events and social circumstances. If it is determined that treatment resistance is due to failure of efficacy of antidepressant monotherapy, then an augmentation strategy using an atypical antipsychotic may be considered. Treatment using olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) is one of many options. Four randomized, acute-phase trials have suggested OFC is useful for reducing Montgomery&ndash;&Aring;sberg Depression Rating Scale scores after inadequate response to antidepressant monotherapy. OFC has been useful at doses of olanzapine/fluoxetine 6/25, 6/50, 12/25 and 12/50 mg/day, with 1/5 mg/day suggested to be an ineffective dose. Treatment with OFC has been associated with some side effects, including weight gain and the metabolic syndrome, somnolence, dry mouth, increased appetite and headache. Treatment decisions therefore need to be made to balance the risks and benefits.<br /

Pharmacological Evaluation of the Long-Term Effects of Xanomeline on the M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor

Xanomeline is a unique agonist of muscarinic receptors that possesses functional selectivity at the M1 and M4 receptor subtypes. It also exhibits wash-resistant binding to and activation of the receptor. In the present work we investigated the consequences of this type of binding of xanomeline on the binding characteristics and function of the M1 muscarinic receptor. Pretreatment of CHO cells that stably express the M1 receptor for 1 hr with increasing concentrations of xanomeline followed by washing and waiting for an additional 23 hr in control culture media transformed xanomeline-induced inhibition of [3H]NMS binding from monophasic to biphasic. The high-affinity xanomeline binding site exhibited three orders of magnitude higher affinity than in the case of xanomeline added directly to the binding assay medium containing control cells. These effects were associated with a marked decrease in maximal radioligand binding and attenuation of agonist-induced increase in PI hydrolysis and were qualitatively similar to those caused by continuous incubation of cells with xanomeline for 24 hr. Attenuation of agonist-induced PI hydrolysis by persistently-bound xanomeline developed with a time course that parallels the return of receptor activation by prebound xanomeline towards basal levels. Additional data indicated that blockade of the receptor orthosteric site or the use of a non-functional receptor mutant reversed the long-term effects of xanomeline, but not its persistent binding at an allosteric site. Furthermore, the long-term effects of xanomeline on the receptor are mainly due to receptor down-regulation rather than internalization

Towards the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics in bipolar disorder.

BackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is a psychiatric illness defined by pathological alterations between the mood states of mania and depression, causing disability, imposing healthcare costs and elevating the risk of suicide. Although effective treatments for BD exist, variability in outcomes leads to a large number of treatment failures, typically followed by a trial and error process of medication switches that can take years. Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT), by tailoring drug choice to an individual, may personalize and expedite treatment so as to identify more rapidly medications well suited to individual BD patients.DiscussionA number of associations have been made in BD between medication response phenotypes and specific genetic markers. However, to date clinical adoption of PGT has been limited, often citing questions that must be answered before it can be widely utilized. These include: What are the requirements of supporting evidence? How large is a clinically relevant effect? What degree of specificity and sensitivity are required? Does a given marker influence decision making and have clinical utility? In many cases, the answers to these questions remain unknown, and ultimately, the question of whether PGT is valid and useful must be determined empirically. Towards this aim, we have reviewed the literature and selected drug-genotype associations with the strongest evidence for utility in BD.SummaryBased upon these findings, we propose a preliminary panel for use in PGT, and a method by which the results of a PGT panel can be integrated for clinical interpretation. Finally, we argue that based on the sufficiency of accumulated evidence, PGT implementation studies are now warranted. We propose and discuss the design for a randomized clinical trial to test the use of PGT in the treatment of BD

Treatment patterns associated with Duloxetine and Venlafaxine use for Major Depressive Disorder

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Duloxetine and venlafaxine extended release (venlafaxine XR) are SNRIs indicated for the treatment of MDD. This study addresses whether duloxetine and venlafaxine XR are interchangeable in their patterns of use with patients who are depressed or are used more selectively based on treatment history, background characteristics, and presenting symptoms.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a retrospective analysis of an administrative insurance claims database. We studied patients in managed care with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with duloxetine or venlafaxine XR. Predictors of treatment and cost were assessed using Chi-square and logistic regression analyses of demographics and past-year medication use and comorbidities.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients with MDD treated with duloxetine (n = 9,641) versus venlafaxine XR (n = 8,514) tended to be older, slightly more likely to be female, and treated by a psychiatrist (<it>P </it>< 0.0001). In the prior year, more duloxetine patients (vs. venlafaxine XR) received ≥3 unique antidepressants (20.8% vs. 16.6%), ≥3 unique pain medications (25.5% vs. 15.6%), and had ≥8 unique diagnosed comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions (38.6% vs. 29.1%). The prior 6-month total health care costs were $1,731 higher for duloxetine than for venlafaxine XR and declined for both medications in the 6 months after treatment began. Logistic regression analysis revealed that 61% of duloxetine patients and 61% of venlafaxine XR patients were predictable from prior patient and treatment factors.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Patients with MDD treated with duloxetine tended to have a more complex and costly antecedent clinical presentation compared with venlafaxine XR patients, suggesting that physicians do not use the medications interchangeably.</p