Rapid Response and Restoration for Coral Reef Injuries in Southeast Florida: Guidelines and Recommendations

From the time an injury to coral reef resources is reported, a well-coordinated and implemented plan is critical to the success of response and restoration efforts. There are three major plan components, each of which is equally important: (1) the Initial Response period immediately following notification of the incident; (2) the Response period, during which the Responsible Party (RP) is identified, the Trustees and RP carry out their respective responsibilities, a Primary Restoration plan is developed, authorizations and contractors to conduct restoration activities are sought and obtained, and primary restoration activities are conducted; and (3) the Post-Response period, which is largely a monitoring, compensatory restoration/mitigation, and penalty assessment phase that takes place after primary restoration activities are carried out. The guidelines and recommendations presented in this docuemnt were developed to examine reef injury response processes and to facilitate a rapid response to, and the successful restoration of, southeast Florida reefs. The document was developed as part of a Local Action Strategy (LAS) of the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI) to develop guidelines and recommendations for a rapid response and restoration process for reef injuries in the SEFCRI region. In February 2006, a two day workshop was held in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, to compile information on existing emergency response processes, identify deficiencies and develop solutions for those processes, and compile information on existing technologies and procedures for triage and the restoration of reef injuries. The first day of the workshop focused on process and policy issues. The second day addressed response, injury and mitigation assessment, restoration and repair, and monitoring. Workshop panelists and attendees included respresentatives from local, state, and federal agencies with proprietary or regulatory authority or jurisdiction over sovereign submerged lands and reef resources located within Florida\u27s waters. Also in attendance were technical and academic experts in the fields of coral reef research, injury assessment, and restoration, as well as marine contractors, private and public attorneys, nongovernmental organizations, and other interested parties. These guidelines and recommendations incorporate information from the combined experience of the workshop attendees, workshop outcomes, published documents, and numerous state and federal regulations, policies, and procedures

Distinct Effects of IL-18 on the Engraftment and Function of Human Effector CD8+ T Cells and Regulatory T Cells

IL-18 has pleotropic effects on the activation of T cells during antigen presentation. We investigated the effects of human IL-18 on the engraftment and function of human T cell subsets in xenograft mouse models. IL-18 enhanced the engraftment of human CD8+ effector T cells and promoted the development of xenogeneic graft versus host disease (GVHD). In marked contrast, IL-18 had reciprocal effects on the engraftment of CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) in the xenografted mice. Adoptive transfer experiments indicated that IL-18 prevented the suppressive effects of Tregs on the development of xenogeneic GVHD. The IL-18 results were robust as they were observed in two different mouse strains. In addition, the effects of IL-18 were systemic as IL-18 promoted engraftment and persistence of human effector T cells and decreased Tregs in peripheral blood, peritoneal cavity, spleen and liver. In vitro experiments indicated that the expression of the IL-18Rα was induced on both CD4 and CD8 effector T cells and Tregs, and that the duration of expression was less sustained on Tregs. These preclinical data suggest that human IL-18 may have use as an adjuvant for immune reconstitution after cytotoxic therapies, and to augment adoptive immunotherapy, donor leukocyte infusions, and vaccine strategies

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

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

The Validation of Eye-Tracking Behaviors of Experts and Novices While Viewing Multiple Representations of Chemistry Concepts

Education research has often interrogated the differences in mental schema between Experts and Novices in a particular discipline. These mental schema, or organizations of ideas and thoughts within a person\u27s brain, can give insight into which connections are essential for complete understanding of a field of study. For instance, in chemistry, it has been found that experts more readily connect chemical concepts visualized in macroscopic, symbolic, and sub-microscopic representations. This triplet relationship has been studied repeatedly in the literature, but requires active think-aloud studies or a series of tests which involve a certain extent of non-natural activity. Eye-tracking has been increasingly used in educational research in order to gain insight into how we interpret information in a passive observational manner. Making use of the triplet relationship, an experiment has been conducted to replicate the expert/novice study conducted by Kozma and Russell in 1997 by using eye-tracking while having participants perform a sorting task. Similar results for the sorting task will validate the interpretation of the eye-tracking analysis methods for future use

PAH Concentrations in Coquina (\u3cem\u3eDonax\u3c/em\u3e spp.) on a Sandy Beach Shoreline Impacted by a Marine Oil Spill

The BP MC252 well failure in the Gulf of Mexico, April 2010 caused concern for crude oil and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAHs) exposure along the sandy beaches of the Florida Panhandle. We began collections of Coquina clams (Donax spp.) from the surf zone of Florida Panhandle beaches to monitor PAH contamination to compliment analysis of surf zone sand samples. These clams had higher levels of PAHs relative to ambient sand, and this allowed us to continue to monitor PAH levels after sand concentrations fell below limits of detection. PAH levels in the Coquina tissues were highly variable, perhaps indicative of the heterogeneous distribution of oil and tar on the beaches and exposure to tar particles. Overall, PAH levels decreased continuously in both sand and Coquina tissues, reaching limits of detection within one and two years respectively after oil landed on Florida Panhandle beaches. Our work suggests these surf zone molluscs may be used to monitor pollutant exposure along high energy sandy beach shorelines

PathoFusion: An Open-Source AI Framework for Recognition of Pathomorphological Features and Mapping of Immunohistochemical Data

We have developed a platform, termed PathoFusion, which is an integrated system for marking, training, and recognition of pathological features in whole-slide tissue sections. The platform uses a bifocal convolutional neural network (BCNN) which is designed to simultaneously capture both index and contextual feature information from shorter and longer image tiles, respectively. This is analogous to how a microscopist in pathology works, identifying a cancerous morphological feature in the tissue context using first a narrow and then a wider focus, hence bifocal. Adjacent tissue sections obtained from glioblastoma cases were processed for hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and immunohistochemical (CD276) staining. Image tiles cropped from the digitized images based on markings made by a consultant neuropathologist were used to train the BCNN. PathoFusion demonstrated its ability to recognize malignant neuropathological features autonomously and map immunohistochemical data simultaneously. Our experiments show that PathoFusion achieved areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.985 ± 0.011 and 0.988 ± 0.001 in patch-level recognition of six typical pathomorphological features and detection of associated immunoreactivity, respectively. On this basis, the system further correlated CD276 immunoreactivity to abnormal tumor vasculature. Corresponding feature distributions and overlaps were visualized by heatmaps, permitting high-resolution qualitative as well as quantitative morphological analyses for entire histological slides. Recognition of more user-defined pathomorphological features can be added to the system and included in future tissue analyses. Integration of PathoFusion with the day-to-day service workflow of a (neuro)pathology department is a goal. The software code for PathoFusion is made publicly available