The Role of the Implementation of National Building Regulations in the Fire Safety Improvement of Industrial Structures

In accordance with national building regulations, human safety and health should not be compromised in any way by the structures. Noncompliance with existing standards can increase the risk of fire in buildings. This study aimed to assess the impact of national building regulations on the reduction of the fire risk level in an industrial structure. In this study, the fire risk level of the building and contents, occupants, and activities were calculated in a power plant control room using Fire Risk Assessment Method for Engineering (FRAME). In the following, by assessing the existing situation, the effect of the implementation of national building regulations was determined on the reduction of fire risk level. The result showed that the fire risk level for occupants (20.64), building and content (1.02) that are above the acceptable level and corrective measures and design changes should be applied to reduce the risk level. Also, in case of application of the third chapter of Iranian National Building Regulations in power plant construction, the fire risk level will be reduced by 11.7% compared to the existing situation This study showed that the implementation of national building standards and regulation can provide the occupants life safety by correctly predicting escape routes. Fire Risk Assessment Method for Engineering (FRAME) is a very effective tool for selecting the best control strategies for fire safety of industrial structures

From sewer to saviour-targeting the lymphatic system to promote drug exposure and activity

The lymphatic system serves an integral role in fluid homeostasis, lipid metabolism and immune control. In cancer, the lymph nodes that drain solid tumours are a primary site of metastasis, and recent studies have suggested intrinsic links between lymphatic function, lipid deposition, obesity and atherosclerosis. Advances in the current understanding of the role of the lymphatics in pathological change and immunity have driven the recognition that lymph-targeted delivery has the potential to transform disease treatment and vaccination. In addition, the design of lymphatic delivery systems has progressed from simple systems that rely on passive lymphatic access to sophisticated structures that use nanotechnology to mimic endogenous macromolecules and lipid conjugates that 'hitchhike' onto lipid transport processes. Here, we briefly summarize the lymphatic system in health and disease and the varying mechanisms of lymphatic entry and transport, as well as discussing examples of lymphatic delivery that have enhanced therapeutic utility. We also outline future challenges to effective lymph-directed therapy

Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation

Contains fulltext : 125374.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Edoxaban is a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor with proven antithrombotic effects. The long-term efficacy and safety of edoxaban as compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation is not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial comparing two once-daily regimens of edoxaban with warfarin in 21,105 patients with moderate-to-high-risk atrial fibrillation (median follow-up, 2.8 years). The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism. Each edoxaban regimen was tested for noninferiority to warfarin during the treatment period. The principal safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: The annualized rate of the primary end point during treatment was 1.50% with warfarin (median time in the therapeutic range, 68.4%), as compared with 1.18% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.99; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 1.07; 97.5% CI, 0.87 to 1.31; P=0.005 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was a trend favoring high-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 0.87; 97.5% CI, 0.73 to 1.04; P=0.08) and an unfavorable trend with low-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 1.13; 97.5% CI, 0.96 to 1.34; P=0.10). The annualized rate of major bleeding was 3.43% with warfarin versus 2.75% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91; P<0.001) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55; P<0.001). The corresponding annualized rates of death from cardiovascular causes were 3.17% versus 2.74% (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.97; P=0.01), and 2.71% (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P=0.008), and the corresponding rates of the key secondary end point (a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or death from cardiovascular causes) were 4.43% versus 3.85% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.96; P=0.005), and 4.23% (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.05; P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Both once-daily regimens of edoxaban were noninferior to warfarin with respect to the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism and were associated with significantly lower rates of bleeding and death from cardiovascular causes. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development; ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00781391.)