The free energy of NOAA active region AR 11029

The NOAA active region AR 11029 was a small but highly active sunspot region which produced 73 GOES soft X-ray flares. The flares appear to show a departure from the well known power-law frequency-size distribution. Specifically, too few GOES C-class and no M-class flares were observed by comparison with a power-law distribution (Wheatland in Astrophys. J. 710, 1324, 2010). This was conjectured to be due to the region having insufficient magnetic energy to power large events. We construct nonlinear force-free extrapolations of the coronal magnetic field of active region AR 11029 using data taken on 24 October by the SOLIS Vector-SpectroMagnetograph (SOLIS/VSM), and data taken on 27 October by the Hinode Solar Optical Telescope SpectroPolarimeter (Hinode/SP). Force-free modeling with photospheric magnetogram data encounters problems because the magnetogram data are inconsistent with a force-free model, and we employ a recently developed `self-consistency' procedure which addresses this and accommodates uncertainties in the boundary data (Wheatland and Regnier in Astrophys. J. 700, L88, 2009). We calculate the total energy and free energy of the self-consistent solution and find that the free energy was 4x10^29 erg on 24 October, and 7x10^31 erg on 27 October. An order of magnitude scaling between RHESSI non-thermal energy and GOES peak X-ray flux is established from a sample of flares from the literature and is used to estimate flare energies from observed GOES peak X-ray flux. Based on the scaling, we conclude that the estimated free energy of AR 11029 on 27 October when the flaring rate peaked is sufficient to power M-class or X-class flares, and hence the modeling does not appear to support the hypothesis that the absence of large flares is due to the region having limited energy.Comment: Accepted for publication in Solar Physic

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

Regulation of VEGF in the reproductive tract by sex-steroid hormones

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a key regulator of angiogenesis. In adults, angiogenesis is an infrequent event in the normal tissue except in the female reproductive tract where angiogenesis occurs frequently during the cyclical repair and regeneration of the endometrium as well as in the ovary. Little is known about angiogenesis in the male reproductive tract. The role of VEGF in controlling reproductive tract physiology and the role of hormones in regulating this key regulator of angiogenesis is not well understood. Since reproductive tract physiology is largely under sexsteroid regulation, we have reviewed some recent studies describing the role of sex-steroid hormones in regulating VEGF. We have also included studies on the role of sexsteroids in regulating VEGF and angiogenesis in endometrial, breast and prostate pathologies. We have provided an extensive review of the classical VEGF and VEGF receptors with examples drawn from numerous studies in the literature using diverse biological systems to encourage similar studies in the area of reproductive tract physiology. It is speculated that such studies will provide insights into understanding the role of VEGF in reproductive tract development, causes of infertility, and cancer. Such knowledge would allow us to target VEGF for improving human reproductive tract abnormalities, for enhancing implantation and fertility, and for designing drugs for treatment of endocrine dependent cancers

Sub-cellular distribution of two salt-induced peptides in roots of Oryza sativa L. var Nonabokra

No Abstrac

APR-246 alone and in combination with a phosphatidylserine-targeting antibody inhibits lung metastasis of human triple-negative breast cancer cells in nude mice

Background: Approximately 15-20 percent of all human breast cancers are classified as triple-negative because they lack estrogen and progesterone receptors and Her-2-neu, which are commonly targeted by chemotherapeutic drugs. New treatment strategies are therefore urgently needed to combat triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs). Almost 80 percent of the triple-negative tumors express mutant p53 (mtp5), a functionally defective tumor suppressor protein. Whereas wild-type p53 (wtp53) promotes cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis and inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor-dependent angiogenesis, mtp53 fails to regulate these functions, resulting in tumor vascularization, growth, resistance to chemotherapy, and metastasis. Restoration of p53 function is therefore a promising drug-targeted strategy for suppressing TNBC metastasis. Methods: APR-246 is a small-molecule drug that reactivates mtp53, thereby restoring p53 function. In this study, we sought to determine whether administration of APR-246, either alone or in combination with 2aG4, an antibody that targets phosphatidylserine residues on tumor blood vessels and disrupts tumor vasculature, effectively inhibits stem cell-like characteristics of tumor cells and migration in vitro, and metastasis of human mtp53-expressing TNBC cells to the lungs in mouse models. Results: APR-246 reduced both the stem cell-like properties and migration of TNBC cells in vitro. In mouse models, administration of either APR-246 or 2aG4 reduced metastasis of TNBC cells to the lungs; a combination of the two diminished lung metastasis to the same extent as either agent alone. Combination treatment significantly reduced the incidence of lung metastasis compared either single agent alone. Conclusion: Metastasis of human mtp53-expressing TNBC cells to the lungs of nude mice is inhibited by the treatment that combines activation of mtp53 with targeting of phosphatidylserine residues on tumor blood vessels. We contend therefore that our findings strongly support the use of combination treatment involving mtp53 activation and immunotherapy in patients with TNBC

Bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer: where have we landed?

Vast preclinical and clinical evidence has made angiogenesis one of the hallmarks of cancer. In many human tumours, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been identified as the crucial mediator of this process. Initial studies suggested that angiogenesis, and VEGF in particular, could be inhibited without the risk of major side effects. After the pivotal data in first-line studies in patients with colorectal cancer, numerous clinical trials have been undertaken in patients with breast cancer. This review attempts to update these investigations and define the role of anti-VEGF antibody treatment in advanced breast cancer