5 research outputs found

    Survey on batch-to-batch variation in spray paints: a collaborative study

    No full text
    This study represents the most extensive analysis of batch-to-batch variations in spray paint samples to date. The survey was performed as a collaborative project of the ENFSI (European Network of Forensic Science Institutes) Paint and Glass Working Group (EPG) and involved 11 laboratories. Several studies have already shown that paint samples of similar color but from different manufacturers can usually be differentiated using an appropriate analytical sequence. The discrimination of paints from the same manufacturer and color (batch-to-batch variations) is of great interest and these data are seldom found in the literature. This survey concerns the analysis of batches from different color groups (white, papaya (special shade of orange), red and black) with a wide range of analytical techniques and leads to the following conclusions. Colored batch samples are more likely to be differentiated since their pigment composition is more complex (pigment mixtures, added pigments) and therefore subject to variations. These variations may occur during the paint production but may also occur when checking the paint shade in quality control processes. For these samples, techniques aimed at color/pigment(s) characterization (optical microscopy, microspectrophotometry (MSP), Raman spectroscopy) provide better discrimination than techniques aimed at the organic (binder) or inorganic composition (fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) or elemental analysis (SEM - scanning electron microscopy and XRF - X-ray fluorescence)). White samples contain mainly titanium dioxide as a pigment and the main differentiation is based on the binder composition (Csingle bondH stretches) detected either by FTIR or Raman. The inorganic composition (elemental analysis) also provides some discrimination. Black samples contain mainly carbon black as a pigment and are problematic with most of the spectroscopic techniques. In this case, pyrolysis-GC/MS represents the best technique to detect differences. Globally, Py-GC/MS may show a high potential of discrimination on all samples but the results are highly dependent on the specific instrumental conditions used. Finally, the discrimination of samples when data was interpreted visually as compared to statistically using principal component analysis (PCA) yielded very similar results. PCA increases sensitivity and could perform better on specific samples, but one first has to ensure that all non-informative variation (baseline deviation) is eliminated by applying correct pre-treatments. Statistical treatments can be used on a large data set and, when combined with an expert's opinion, will provide more objective criteria for decision making

    Mechanism of KMT5B haploinsufficiency in neurodevelopment in humans and mice

    No full text
    Pathogenic variants in KMT5B, a lysine methyltransferase, are associated with global developmental delay, macrocephaly, autism, and congenital anomalies (OMIM# 617788). Given the relatively recent discovery of this disorder, it has not been fully characterized. Deep phenotyping of the largest (n = 43) patient cohort to date identified that hypotonia and congenital heart defects are prominent features that were previously not associated with this syndrome. Both missense variants and putative loss-of-function variants resulted in slow growth in patient-derived cell lines. KMT5B homozygous knockout mice were smaller in size than their wild-type littermates but did not have significantly smaller brains, suggesting relative macrocephaly, also noted as a prominent clinical feature. RNA sequencing of patient lymphoblasts and Kmt5b haploinsufficient mouse brains identified differentially expressed pathways associated with nervous system development and function including axon guidance signaling. Overall, we identified additional pathogenic variants and clinical features in KMT5B-related neurodevelopmental disorder and provide insights into the molecular mechanisms of the disorder using multiple model systems.UnknownThe article is available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text

    Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group

    Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events
    corecore