Quality of Life Among Veterans With Chronic Spinal Cord Injury and Related Variables

Background: In recent decades, the incidence of spinal cord injuries has increased. In a systemic review on epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury in developing countries reported 25.5/million cases per year. Objectives: To assess the quality of life (QOL) of the veterans among Iran-Iraq war with chronic spinal cord injuries (SCI) and to evaluate long-term impressions of SCI on their quality of life. Patients and Methods: Fifty-two veterans, all male, with chronic spinal cord injury from Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988) were interviewed and examined. The mean age of veterans at the time of interview was 49.3 years (38 to 80 years). Veterans were assessed by using a 36-item short-form (SF-36), hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) and the Barthel index. The presence or absence of pressure sores and spasticity were documented as well. Results: The mean age of veterans at the time of study was 49.3 years. Pearson's correlation test showed that depression and anxiety have a reverse association with mental component summary (MCS) scale and physical component summary (PCS) scale scores, respectively. Regression analysis showed a negative effect of depression and pressure sore on PCS. Moreover, no association was found between the duration of injury and age with quality of life. Conclusions: Lower QOL was found among veterans with chronic SCI. More researches on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are needed to give us a better understanding of changes in life of patients with SCI and the ways to improve them

Chronic or recurrent Campylobacter enteritis in primary immunodeficiency: A UK national case-series and review of the literature

Campylobacter infection is an important diagnosis to consider in primary immunodeficiency patients with chronic or recurrent diarrhea, particularly in those with very low diagnostic immunoglobulin levels. Macrolides, aminoglycosides, and/or carbapenems are promising treatment options for this potentially debilitating condition

In Vitro and in Vivo Effectiveness of Carvacrol, Thymol and Linalool against Leishmania infantum

Background: One of the most important causative agents of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is Leishmania infantum, which is mainly spread by Phlebotomus and Lutzomyia sandflies in the Old and New World, respectively. Novel and effective drugs to manage this neglected vector-borne disease are urgently required. In this study, we evaluated the toxicity of carvacrol, thymol and linalool, three common essential oil constituents, on amastigotes and promastigotes of L. infantum. Methods: in vitro experiments were performed by 24 h MTT assay. Carvacrol, thymol and linalool at concentrations ranging from 1.3 to 10 µg/mL were tested on promastigotes of L. infantum. For in vivo test, two groups of hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) received 100 mg/kg of body weight/day of carvacrol and thymol as intraperitoneal injection on day 7 post-infection, followed by a 48 h later injection. The third group was treated with the glucantime as standard drug (500 mg/kg) and the last group (control) just received normal saline. On the 16th day, the number of parasites and histopathological changes in liver and spleen were investigated. Results: 24 h MTT assay showed promising antileishmanial activity of thymol and carvacrol, with IC50 values of 7.2 (48 µM) and 9.8 µg/mL (65 µM), respectively. Linalool at all concentrations did not affect L. infantum promastigote viability. In vivo toxicity data of carvacrol and thymol showed that the former at 100 mg/kg was the safest and most effective treatment with little side effects on the liver. Conclusions: Overall, thymol and carvacrol are highly promising candidates for the development of effective and safe drugs in the fight against VL

Ecological effects of alternative fuel-reduction treatments: highlights of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate study (FFS)

The 12-site National Fire and Fire Surrogate study (FFS) was a multivariate experiment that evaluated ecological consequences of alternative fuel-reduction treatments in seasonally dry forests of the US. Each site was a replicated experiment with a common design that compared an un-manipulated control, prescribed fire, mechanical and mechanical + fire treatments. Variables within the vegetation, fuelbed, forest floor and soil, bark beetles, tree diseases and wildlife were measured in 10-ha stands, and ecological response was compared among treatments at the site level, and across sites, to better understand the influence of differential site conditions. For most sites, treated stands were predicted to be more resilient to wildfire if it occurred shortly after treatment, but for most ecological variables, short-term response to treatments was subtle and transient. Strong site-specificity was observed in the response of most ecosystem variables, suggesting that practitioners employ adaptive management at the local scale. Because ecosystem components were tightly linked, adaptive management would need to include monitoring of a carefully chosen set of key variables. Mechanical treatments did not serve as surrogates for fire for most variables, suggesting that fire be maintained whenever possible. Restoration to pre-settlement conditions will require repeated treatments over time, with eastern forests requiring more frequent applications.Keywords: Oak, Prescribed fire, Frequent fire regimes, Pine, Mechanical treatment, Forest thinning, Dry forest management, Seasonally dry forest

Identifying the quality of life effects of urinary incontinence with depression in an Australian population

Background: To explore the additive effect of urinary incontinence, in people with comorbid depression, on health related quality of life. Methods: Males and females, 15 to 95 years (n = 3010, response rate 70.2%) were interviewed face to face in the 1998 Autumn South Australian Health Omnibus Survey. Results: Self-reported urinary incontinence was found in 20.3% (n=610), and depression as defined by the PRIME-MD in 15.2% (n=459) of the survey population. Urinary incontinence with comorbid depression was found in 4.3% of the overall population. Univariate analysis showed that respondents with urinary incontinence and comorbid depression were more likely to be aged between 15 and 34 years and never married when compared to those with incontinence only. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that in people with incontinence, the risk of having comorbid depression was increased by an overall health status of Fair or Poor, or the perception that their incontinence was moderately or very serious. Respondents reporting that they experienced incontinence with comorbid depression scored significantly lower than those experiencing incontinence without depression on all dimensions of the SF-36. The interaction of the presence of incontinence and the presence of depression was significantly associated with the dimensions of physical functioning. Conclusions: Depression and incontinence both reduce QOL. When they occur together there appears to be an additive effect which affects both physical and mental health, perhaps by increasing a person’s negative perceptions of their illness. Clinicians should identify and manage comorbid depression when treating patients who have incontinence to improve their overall QOL.Jodie C Avery, Nigel P Stocks, Paul Duggan, Annette J Braunack-Mayer, Anne W Taylor, Robert D Goldney and Alastair H MacLenna

Primjena i kompozicija individualiziranih zaštitnih elemenata linijske grafike u projektiranju novčanica

Proces stvaranja novčanica je dugotrajan i složen, što rezultira kompleksnim rješenjima koja predstavljaju pravo remek djelo grafike. Novčanice su prožete brojnim detaljima i prenose različite informacije koje se analiziraju u teorijskom dijelu rada. Prvotno se postavljaju kriteriji po kojima se izrađuje detaljna analiza velikog broja zaštitnih i konceptualnih elemenata na primjerima novčanica. Time je prikazan okvirni povijesni pregled razvoja novčanica i utjecaji kojima je bio izložen. Analizira se međuovisnost dizajna o sigurnosnim značajkama, te se ispituje razina informiranosti javnosti o zaštitama na novčanicama. Zaključuje se koje metode zaštite su najučinkovitije, te kako šira javnost najčešće provjerava autentičnost novčanica. U eksperimentalnom dijelu rada se na temelju donesenih zaključaka iz teorijskog dijela izrađuje prototip novčanice koja je u najvećoj mjeri prožeta individualiziranim PostScript programskim rješenjima elemenata linijske grafike (rozete, mikrotekst, zaštitne linije, brojevi apoena), a od ostalih zaštita modeliran je individualizirani raster transformacijom matematičkog izraza u PostScript programski kod. Sve ostale zaštite tipične za novčanice simulirane su alatima za rastersku i vektorsku grafiku. U radu se ispituje utjecaj kompozicije zaštitnih elemenata na prepoznavanje autentičnosti novčanica, te efikasnost samih individualiziranih programskih rješenja

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials