Development and validation of a luminescence-based, medium-throughput assay for drug screening in Schistosoma mansoni

Schistosomiasis, one of the world's greatest neglected tropical diseases, is responsible for over 280,000 human deaths per annum. Praziquantel, developed in the 1970s, has high efficacy, excellent tolerability, few and transient side effects, simple administration procedures and competitive cost and it is currently the only recommended drug for treatment of human schistosomiasis. The use of a single drug to treat a population of over 200 million infected people appears particularly alarming when considering the threat of drug resistance. Quantitative, objective and validated methods for the screening of compound collections are needed for the discovery of novel anti-schistosomal drugs. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The present work describes the development and validation of a luminescence-based, medium-throughput assay for the detection of schistosomula viability through quantitation of ATP, a good indicator of metabolically active cells in culture. This validated method is demonstrated to be fast, highly reliable, sensitive and automation-friendly. The optimized assay was used for the screening of a small compound library on S. mansoni schistosomula, showing that the proposed method is suitable for a medium-throughput semi-automated screening. Interestingly, the pilot screening identified hits previously reported to have some anti-parasitic activity, further supporting the validity of this assay for anthelminthic drug discovery. CONCLUSIONS: The developed and validated schistosomula viability luminescence-based assay was shown to be successful and suitable for the identification of novel compounds potentially exploitable in future schistosomiasis therapies

CO2 Hydrogenation Induced by Mechanochemical Activation of Olivine With Water Under CO2 Atmosphere

A study on the mechanochemical activation of the olivine in presence of H2O and under CO2 atmosphere have been approached, focusing both on the structural nature of the transformation and the conversion of CO2 to methane and light hydrocarbons. The mechanochemical process was carried out by high energy laboratory mills, with milling vials properly modified in order to be used as batch reactors. Chemical reactivity and reaction rates were investigated under different experimental conditions, evidencing increased performance with respect to the thermally activated process reported in literature. Mechanical treatment induced H2O and olivine activation, with consequent release of molecular H2 which, in turn, allowed hydrogenation of activated CO2. This last reaction also led, through a competitive process, to the precipitation of carbonate phases, whose composition and structural features were dependent of the CO2/H2O ratio.Fil: Farina, Valeria. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; ItaliaFil: Gamba, Nadia Soledad. Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica. Gerencia de Área de Aplicaciones de la Tecnología Nuclear. Gerencia de Investigación Aplicada; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Unidad Ejecutora Instituto de Nanociencia y Nanotecnología. Unidad Ejecutora Instituto de Nanociencia y Nanotecnología - Nodo Bariloche | Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica. Unidad Ejecutora Instituto de Nanociencia y Nanotecnología. Unidad Ejecutora Instituto de Nanociencia y Nanotecnología - Nodo Bariloche; ArgentinaFil: Gennari, Fabiana Cristina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica. Gerencia de Área de Aplicaciones de la Tecnología Nuclear. Gerencia de Investigación Aplicada; ArgentinaFil: Garroni, Sebastiano. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; ItaliaFil: Torre, Francesco. Università Degli Studi Di Cagliari; ItaliaFil: Taras, Alessandro. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; ItaliaFil: Enzo, Stefano. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; ItaliaFil: Mulas, Gabriele. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; Itali

Producto #3 - Protocolo del Sistema Silvo - Apícola - Pastoril (SAP).

This document developed within the framework of the Innovation Network project for Rural Development of the Gran Chaco Americano in the Context of Climate Change - ref. ATN/RF-16112-RG, aims to be a tool where knowledge and recommended practices of three types of production present in the native forests of the Gran Chaco Americano converge: forestry, livestock and beekeeping. The combination of productions such as beekeeping, forestry and livestock have the purpose of maximizing the use of radiant energy and minimizing soil erosion and loss of functions and fertility. The silvo-apicultural pastoral or silvo-apicultural livestock management is a productive model where the production of the forest, beekeeping, forage and grazing of animals are simultaneously integrated into a management unit in a sustainable and respectful manner with the environment. Current production models propose a dilemma between agricultural, forestry, livestock or monoculture production as valid alternatives to develop production without taking into account those who wish to promote forestry, pastoral and beekeeping practices. Beekeeping as a complementary activity and totally conjugable with any of the previously mentioned productions, is associated especially well in the Silvopastoral systems in the Gran Chaco Americano Region where the native forest predominates and takes advantage of resources in addition to providing ecosystem services such as pollination of different species. vegetables. In preserved natural forest areas, agricultural systems are often involved where annual or perennial crops are incorporated, as well as pastures for cattle. Forest Management with Integrated Livestock (MBGI) proposes the use of the forest in an integral way that serves as an alternative for sustainable development in the face of changes in land use. In this framework, forest conservation and livestock management are included together with beekeeping in the same productive matrix, allowing the integration of all components and taking advantage of the benefits that each one contributes to the system in general.El Presente documento desarrollado, en el marco del proyecto Red de Innovación para el Desarrollo Rural del Gran Chaco Americano en el Contexto del Cambio Climático - ref. ATN/RF-16112-RG, pretende ser una herramienta donde confluyen los saberes y las prácticas recomendables de tres tipos de producciones presentes en los bosques nativos del Gran Chaco Americano: la silvicultura, la ganadería y la apicultura. La combinación de producciones como la apícola, forestal y la ganadera tienen la finalidad de maximizar el uso de la energía radiante y minimizar la erosión del suelo y pérdida de funciones y fertilidad. El manejo silvo apícola pastoril o silvo apícola ganadero es un modelo productivo donde se integran en una unidad de manejo simultáneamente la producción del bosque, la apicultura, el forraje y el pastoreo de animales de manera sustentable y respetuosa con el ambiente. Los modelos productivos actuales proponen una disyuntiva entre producciones agrícolas, forestales, ganaderas o monocultivos como alternativas válidas para desarrollar una producción sin tener en cuenta a aquellos que desean promover las prácticas silvo pastoriles y apícolas. La apicultura como actividad complementaria y totalmente conjugable con cualquiera de las producciones mencionadas previamente, se asocia especialmente bien en los sistemas Silvopastoriles en la Región del Gran Chaco Americano donde predomina el bosque nativo y aprovecha recursos además de aportar servicios ecosistémicos como la polinización de diferentes especies vegetales. En las áreas de bosque natural preservadas, muchas veces se involucran sistemas agrícolas donde se incorporan cultivos anuales o perennes, así como pasturas para el ganado. El Manejo de Bosque con Ganadería Integrada (MBGI) propone el aprovechamiento del bosque de una manera integral que sirva como una alternativa de desarrollo sustentable frente a los cambios en el uso del suelo. En este marco, la conservación del bosque y el manejo ganadero son incluidos junto con la apicultura en una misma matriz productiva, posibilitando la integración de todos los componentes y aprovechando los beneficios que cada uno aporta al sistema en general.Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Famaillá (EEA Famaillá)Fil: Gennari, Gerardo Pablo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Famaillá; Argentina.Fil: Palacio, María Alejandra. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina.Fil: Cabrera, Carlos Gustavo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Salta. Agencia De Extensión Rural Joaquín V. González; Argentina.Fil: Cabrera, Carlos Gustavo. Fondo Regional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (FONTAGRO); Argentina.Fil: Ledesma, Ariel Rolando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santiago del Estero; Argentina.Fil: Ledesma, Ariel Rolando. Fondo Regional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (FONTAGRO); Argentina.Fil: Salim, Nadia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santiago del Estero; Argentin

Systemic pro-inflammatory response identifies patients with cancer with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: the OnCovid Inflammatory Score

Background: Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study. Methods: In a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets. Results: We evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611). Conclusions: Systemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer

Pandemic Phase-Adjusted Analysis of COVID-19 Outcomes Reveals Reduced Intrinsic Vulnerability and Substantial Vaccine Protection From Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Although representing the majority of newly diagnosed cancers, patients with breast cancer appear less vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality compared with other malignancies. In the absence of patients on active cancer therapy included in vaccination trials, a contemporary real-world evaluation of outcomes during the various pandemic phases, as well as of the impact of vaccination, is needed to better inform clinical practice. METHODS We compared COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with breast cancer across prevaccination (February 27, 2020-November 30, 2020), Alpha-Delta (December 1, 2020-December 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 15, 2021-January 31, 2022) phases using OnCovid registry participants (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04393974). Twenty-eight-day case fatality rate (CFR28) and COVID-19 severity were compared in unvaccinated versus double-dosed/boosted patients (vaccinated) with inverse probability of treatment weighting models adjusted for country of origin, age, number of comorbidities, tumor stage, and receipt of systemic anticancer therapy within 1 month of COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS By the data lock of February 4, 2022, the registry counted 613 eligible patients with breast cancer: 60.1% (n = 312) hormone receptor-positive, 25.2% (n = 131) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and 14.6% (n = 76) triple-negative. The majority (61%; n = 374) had localized/locally advanced disease. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 51-74 years). A total of 193 patients (31.5%) presented >= 2 comorbidities and 69% (n = 330) were never smokers. In total, 392 (63.9%), 164 (26.8%), and 57 (9.3%) were diagnosed during the prevaccination, Alpha-Delta, and Omicron phases, respectively. Analysis of CFR28 demonstrates comparable estimates of mortality across the three pandemic phases (13.9%, 12.2%, 5.3%, respectively; P = .182). Nevertheless, a significant improvement in outcome measures of COVID-19 severity across the three pandemic time periods was observed. Importantly, when reported separately, unvaccinated patients from the Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases achieved comparable outcomes to those from the prevaccination phase. Of 566 patients eligible for the vaccination analysis, 72 (12.7%) were fully vaccinated and 494 (87.3%) were unvaccinated. We confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting multivariable analysis and following a clustered robust correction for participating center that vaccinated patients achieved improved CFR28 (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.40), hospitalization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.69), COVID-19 complications (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.45), and reduced requirement of COVID-19-specific therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.63) and oxygen therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67) compared with unvaccinated controls. CONCLUSION Our findings highlight a consistent reduction of COVID-19 severity in patients with breast cancer during the Omicron outbreak in Europe. We also demonstrate that even in this population, a complete severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination course is a strong determinant of improved morbidity and mortality from COVID-19

COVID-19 Sequelae and the Host Pro-Inflammatory Response: An Analysis From the OnCovid Registry

Background: Fifteen percent of patients with cancer experience symptomatic sequelae, which impair post–COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we investigated whether a proinflammatory status is associated with the development of COVID-19 sequelae. / Methods: OnCovid recruited 2795 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection between February 27, 2020, and February 14, 2021. This analysis focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent a clinical reassessment after the exclusion of patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated the association of inflammatory markers collected at COVID-19 diagnosis with sequelae, considering the impact of previous systemic anticancer therapy. All statistical tests were 2-sided. / Results: Of 1339 eligible patients, 203 experienced at least 1 sequela (15.2%). Median baseline C-reactive protein (CRP; 77.5 mg/L vs 22.2 mg/L, P < .001), lactate dehydrogenase (310 UI/L vs 274 UI/L, P = .03), and the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR; 6.0 vs 4.3, P = .001) were statistically significantly higher among patients who experienced sequelae, whereas no association was reported for the platelet to lymphocyte ratio and the OnCovid Inflammatory Score, which includes albumin and lymphocytes. The widest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was reported for baseline CRP (AUC = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63 to 0.69), followed by the NLR (AUC = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.61) and lactate dehydrogenase (AUC = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.61). Using a fixed categorical multivariable analysis, high CRP (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.67 to 3.91) and NLR (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.10) were confirmed to be statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of sequelae. Exposure to chemotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of sequelae (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.91), whereas no associations with immune checkpoint inhibitors, endocrine therapy, and other types of systemic anticancer therapy were found. / Conclusions: Although the association between inflammatory status, recent chemotherapy and sequelae warrants further investigation, our findings suggest that a deranged proinflammatory reaction at COVID-19 diagnosis may predict for sequelae development

Determinants of enhanced vulnerability to coronavirus disease 2019 in UK patients with cancer: a European study

Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe (EU), the United Kingdom (UK) is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100,000 as of January 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risk of death in UK patients with cancer versus those in continental EU. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of patients with cancer consecutively diagnosed with COVID-19 in 27 centres from 27th February to 10th September 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline including oncological and COVID-19-specific therapy across UK and EU cohorts and evaluated the association of these factors with the risk of adverse outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models. Findings: Compared with EU (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001) and higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%; p < 0.0001; HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often men, were of older age and have more comorbidities than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anticancer therapy was lower in UK than in EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated COVID-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK patients with cancer were less likely to receive anti-COVID-19 therapies including corticosteroids, antivirals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of the patient's age, gender, tumour stage and status; number of comorbidities; COVID-19 severity and receipt of anticancer and anti-COVID-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anticancer therapy after COVID-19 were similar in the UK and EU cohorts. Interpretation: UK patients with cancer have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anticancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK patients with cancer highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted

SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529)-related COVID-19 sequelae in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer: results from the OnCovid registry

Background COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2. Methods OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. Findings At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [ 50 center dot 7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49 center dot 3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16 center dot 6%; 95% CI 14 center dot 8-18 center dot 5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the prevaccination phase (191 [19 center dot 1%; 95% CI 16 center dot 4-22 center dot 0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16 center dot 8%; 13 center dot 8- 20 center dot 3] of 653 patients, p=0 center dot 24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6 center dot 2%; 3 center dot 5-10 center dot 2] of 256 patients, p<0 center dot 0001). In the alpha- delta phase, 84 (18 center dot 3%; 95% CI 14 center dot 6-22 center dot 7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 9- 27 center dot 3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7 center dot 4%; 95% CI 3 center dot 5-13 center dot 5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9 center dot 8%; 5 center dot 8-15 center dot 5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [ 18 center dot 5%; 16 center dot 5-20 center dot 9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0 center dot 0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 6-9 center dot 6], 11 [6 center dot 0%; 3 center dot 0-10 center dot 7] vs 148 [9 center dot 9%; 8 center dot 4- 11 center dot 6], p= 0 center dot 030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2 center dot 2%; 0 center dot 1-6 center dot 4], ten [5 center dot 4%; 2 center dot 6-10 center dot 0] vs 115 [7 center dot 7%; 6 center dot 3-9 center dot 3], p=0 center dot 037)