Extreme star formation events in quasar hosts over 0.5<z<4{\bf0.5<\textit{z}<4}

We explore the relationship between active galactic nuclei and star formation in a sample of 513 optically luminous type 1 quasars up to redshifts of $\sim$4 hosting extremely high star formation rates (SFRs). The quasars are selected to be individually detected by the \textit{Herschel} SPIRE instrument at $>$3$\sigma$ at 250 $\mu$m, leading to typical SFRs of order of 1000 M$_{\odot}$yr$^{-1}$. We find the average SFRs to increase by almost a factor 10 from $z\sim0.5$ to $z\sim3$, mirroring the rise in the comoving SFR density over the same epoch. However, we find that the SFRs remain approximately constant with increasing accretion luminosity for accretion luminosities above 10$^{12}$ L$_{\odot}$. We also find that the SFRs do not correlate with black hole mass. Both of these results are most plausibly explained by the existence of a self-regulation process by the starburst at high SFRs, which controls SFRs on time-scales comparable to or shorter than the AGN or starburst duty cycles. We additionally find that SFRs do not depend on Eddington ratio at any redshift, consistent with no relation between SFR and black hole growth rate per unit black hole mass. Finally, we find that high-ionisation broad absorption line (HiBAL) quasars have indistinguishable far-infrared properties to those of classical quasars, consistent with HiBAL quasars being normal quasars observed along a particular line of sight, with the outflows in HiBAL quasars not having any measurable effect on the star formation in their hosts.Comment: 12 pages, 6 figure

Star formation rates in luminous quasars at 2 <z< 3

We investigate the relation between star formation rates (M ˙ s M˙s ) and AGN properties in optically selected type 1 quasars at 2 < z < 3 using data from Herschel and the SDSS. We find that M ˙ s M˙s remains approximately constant with redshift, at 300 ± 100 M⊙ yr−1. Conversely, M ˙ s M˙s increases with AGN luminosity, up to a maximum of ∼ 600 M⊙ yr−1, and with C IV FWHM. In context with previous results, this is consistent with a relation between M ˙ s M˙s and black hole accretion rate (M ˙ bh M˙bh ) existing in only parts of the z−M ˙ s −M ˙ bh z−M˙s−M˙bh plane, dependent on the free gas fraction, the trigger for activity, and the processes that may quench star formation. The relations between M ˙ s M˙s and both AGN luminosity and C IV FWHM are consistent with star formation rates in quasars scaling with black hole mass, though we cannot rule out a separate relation with black hole accretion rate. Star formation rates are observed to decline with increasing C IV equivalent width. This decline can be partially explained via the Baldwin effect, but may have an additional contribution from one or more of three factors; Mi is not a linear tracer of L2500, the Baldwin effect changes form at high AGN luminosities, and high C IV EW values signpost a change in the relation between M ˙ s M˙s and M ˙ bh M˙bh . Finally, there is no strong relation between M ˙ s M˙s and Eddington ratio, or the asymmetry of the C IV line. The former suggests that star formation rates do not scale with how efficiently the black hole is accreting, while the latter is consistent with C IV asymmetries arising from orientation effects

Current and prospective pharmacological targets in relation to antimigraine action

Migraine is a recurrent incapacitating neurovascular disorder characterized by unilateral and throbbing headaches associated with photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, and vomiting. Current specific drugs used in the acute treatment of migraine interact with vascular receptors, a fact that has raised concerns about their cardiovascular safety. In the past, α-adrenoceptor agonists (ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, isometheptene) were used. The last two decades have witnessed the advent of 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists (sumatriptan and second-generation triptans), which have a well-established efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Moreover, current prophylactic treatments of migraine include 5-HT2 receptor antagonists, Ca2+ channel blockers, and β-adrenoceptor antagonists. Despite the progress in migraine research and in view of its complex etiology, this disease still remains underdiagnosed, and available therapies are underused. In this review, we have discussed pharmacological targets in migraine, with special emphasis on compounds acting on 5-HT (5-HT1-7), adrenergic (α1, α2, and β), calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP 1 and CGRP2), adenosine (A1, A2, and A3), glutamate (NMDA, AMPA, kainate, and metabotropic), dopamine, endothelin, and female hormone (estrogen and progesterone) receptors. In addition, we have considered some other targets, including gamma-aminobutyric acid, angiotensin, bradykinin, histamine, and ionotropic receptors, in relation to antimigraine therapy. Finally, the cardiovascular safety of current and prospective antimigraine therapies is touched upon

Dissecting the Shared Genetic Architecture of Suicide Attempt, Psychiatric Disorders, and Known Risk Factors

Background Suicide is a leading cause of death worldwide, and nonfatal suicide attempts, which occur far more frequently, are a major source of disability and social and economic burden. Both have substantial genetic etiology, which is partially shared and partially distinct from that of related psychiatric disorders. Methods We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 29,782 suicide attempt (SA) cases and 519,961 controls in the International Suicide Genetics Consortium (ISGC). The GWAS of SA was conditioned on psychiatric disorders using GWAS summary statistics via multitrait-based conditional and joint analysis, to remove genetic effects on SA mediated by psychiatric disorders. We investigated the shared and divergent genetic architectures of SA, psychiatric disorders, and other known risk factors. Results Two loci reached genome-wide significance for SA: the major histocompatibility complex and an intergenic locus on chromosome 7, the latter of which remained associated with SA after conditioning on psychiatric disorders and replicated in an independent cohort from the Million Veteran Program. This locus has been implicated in risk-taking behavior, smoking, and insomnia. SA showed strong genetic correlation with psychiatric disorders, particularly major depression, and also with smoking, pain, risk-taking behavior, sleep disturbances, lower educational attainment, reproductive traits, lower socioeconomic status, and poorer general health. After conditioning on psychiatric disorders, the genetic correlations between SA and psychiatric disorders decreased, whereas those with nonpsychiatric traits remained largely unchanged. Conclusions Our results identify a risk locus that contributes more strongly to SA than other phenotypes and suggest a shared underlying biology between SA and known risk factors that is not mediated by psychiatric disorders.Peer reviewe

Worldwide trends in population-based survival for children, adolescents, and young adults diagnosed with leukaemia, by subtype, during 2000–14 (CONCORD-3) : analysis of individual data from 258 cancer registries in 61 countries

Background Leukaemias comprise a heterogenous group of haematological malignancies. In CONCORD-3, we analysed data for children (aged 0–14 years) and adults (aged 15–99 years) diagnosed with a haematological malignancy during 2000–14 in 61 countries. Here, we aimed to examine worldwide trends in survival from leukaemia, by age and morphology, in young patients (aged 0–24 years). Methods We analysed data from 258 population-based cancer registries in 61 countries participating in CONCORD-3 that submitted data on patients diagnosed with leukaemia. We grouped patients by age as children (0–14 years), adolescents (15–19 years), and young adults (20–24 years). We categorised leukaemia subtypes according to the International Classification of Childhood Cancer (ICCC-3), updated with International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third edition (ICD-O-3) codes. We estimated 5-year net survival by age and morphology, with 95% CIs, using the non-parametric Pohar-Perme estimator. To control for background mortality, we used life tables by country or region, single year of age, single calendar year and sex, and, where possible, by race or ethnicity. All-age survival estimates were standardised to the marginal distribution of young people with leukaemia included in the analysis. Findings 164563 young people were included in this analysis: 121328 (73·7%) children, 22963 (14·0%) adolescents, and 20272 (12·3%) young adults. In 2010–14, the most common subtypes were lymphoid leukaemia (28205 [68·2%] patients) and acute myeloid leukaemia (7863 [19·0%] patients). Age-standardised 5-year net survival in children, adolescents, and young adults for all leukaemias combined during 2010–14 varied widely, ranging from 46% in Mexico to more than 85% in Canada, Cyprus, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, and Australia. Individuals with lymphoid leukaemia had better age-standardised survival (from 43% in Ecuador to ≥80% in parts of Europe, North America, Oceania, and Asia) than those with acute myeloid leukaemia (from 32% in Peru to ≥70% in most high-income countries in Europe, North America, and Oceania). Throughout 2000–14, survival from all leukaemias combined remained consistently higher for children than adolescents and young adults, and minimal improvement was seen for adolescents and young adults in most countries. Interpretation This study offers the first worldwide picture of population-based survival from leukaemia in children, adolescents, and young adults. Adolescents and young adults diagnosed with leukaemia continue to have lower survival than children. Trends in survival from leukaemia for adolescents and young adults are important indicators of the quality of cancer management in this age group.peer-reviewe

Global survival trends for brain tumors, by histology: analysis of individual records for 556,237 adults diagnosed in 59 countries during 2000–2014 (CONCORD-3)

Background: Survival is a key metric of the effectiveness of a health system in managing cancer. We set out to provide a comprehensive examination of worldwide variation and trends in survival from brain tumors in adults, by histology. Methods: We analyzed individual data for adults (15–99 years) diagnosed with a brain tumor (ICD-O-3 topography code C71) during 2000–2014, regardless of tumor behavior. Data underwent a 3-phase quality control as part of CONCORD-3. We estimated net survival for 11 histology groups, using the unbiased nonparametric Pohar Perme estimator. Results: The study included 556,237 adults. In 2010–2014, the global range in age-standardized 5-year net survival for the most common sub-types was broad: in the range 20%–38% for diffuse and anaplastic astrocytoma, from 4% to 17% for glioblastoma, and between 32% and 69% for oligodendroglioma. For patients with glioblastoma, the largest gains in survival occurred between 2000–2004 and 2005–2009. These improvements were more noticeable among adults diagnosed aged 40–70 years than among younger adults. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this study provides the largest account to date of global trends in population-based survival for brain tumors by histology in adults. We have highlighted remarkable gains in 5-year survival from glioblastoma since 2005, providing large-scale empirical evidence on the uptake of chemoradiation at population level. Worldwide, survival improvements have been extensive, but some countries still lag behind. Our findings may help clinicians involved in national and international tumor pathway boards to promote initiatives aimed at more extensive implementation of clinical guidelines

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