Application of Social Network Analysis for Livelihood System Study

Social Network Analysis (SNA) has received growing attention among diverse academic fields for studying ‘social relations’ among individuals and institutions. Unfortunately, its application has remained limited in the study of livelihood systems of rural poor. Complexity in rural livelihoods has increased sharply in the face of increased pressure on natural resources and rapid shift in farm-based to non-farm based employments. This poses great challenge to successful livelihood intervention in rural areas. On one hand, rural development/extension needs to cater to diverse information and service need of the rural people; on other hand, rural institutions need to deliver livelihood-sustaining services more efficiently, which often need institutional restructuring at multiple levels. To achieve these challenges, a strong innovative analytical tool is required for understanding the complexity of rural livelihoods and the associated role of rural institutions. SNA provides excellent scope to analyse such complex systems and interactions among their components. This article proposes an outline of using SNA in livelihood system analysis. The analysis can provide answer to many questions of practical importance – Who are the influential actors in a livelihood system? Which are the key institutions contributing towards sustainable livelihoods? How do these actors interact among themselves? This will help rural development administrators to deliver livelihood-supporting services more efficiently through informed targeting and capacity building

An ANFIS model-based approach to investigate the effect of lockdown due to COVID-19 on public health

During the first and second quarters of the year 2020, most of the countries had implemented complete or partial lockdown policies to slow down the transmission of the COVID-19. To cultivate the effect of lockdown due to COVID-19 on public health, we have collected the data of six primary parameters, namely systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, fasting blood sugar, insomnia, cholesterol, and respiratory distress of 200 randomly chosen people from a municipality region of West Bengal, India before and after lockdown. With the help of these data and Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), we have formulated a model that has established that lockdown due to COVID-19 has negligible impacts on the individuals with better health condition but has significant effects on the health conditions to those populations who have poor health

Synthesis and structure of iron (III) and iron (II) complexes in S₄P₂ environment created by diethyldithiocarbamate and 1,2-bis(diphenylphosphino)ethane chelation: Investigation of the electronic structure of the complexes by Mössbauer and magnetic studies

Iron (II) and iron (III) complexes, [FeII(DEDTC)2(dppe)] · CH2Cl2 (1), [FeII(ETXANT)2(dppe)] (2) (DEDTC = diethyldithiocarbamate, ETXANT = ethyl xanthate, dppe = 1,2-bis (diphenylphosphino) ethane), and [FeIII(DEDTC)2(dppe)] [FeIIICl4] (3) have been synthesized and characterized. Since 3 contains two magnetic centers, an anion metathesis reaction has been conducted to replace the tetrahedral FeCl4− by a non-magnetic BPh4− ion producing [FeIII(DEDTC)2(dppe)]BPh4 (4) for the sake of unequivocal understanding of the magnetic behavior of the cation of 3. With the similar end in view, the well-known FeCl4− ion, the counter anion of 3, is trapped as PPh4[FeIIICl4] (5) and its magnetic property from 298 to 2 K has been studied. Besides the spectroscopic (IR, UV–Vis, NMR, EPR, Mass and XPS) characterization of the appropriate compounds, especially 2, others viz. 1, 3 and 4 have been structurally characterized by X-ray crystallography. While FeII complexes, 1 and 2, are diamagnetic, the FeIII systems, namely the cations of 3, and 4 behave as low-spin (S = 1/2) paramagnetic species from 298 to 50 K. Below 50 K 3 shows gradual increase of χMT up to 2 K suggesting ferromagnetic behavior while 4 exhibits gradual decrease of magnetic moment from 60 to 2 K, indicating the occurrence of weak antiferromagnetic interaction. These conclusions are supported by the Mössbauer studies of 3 and 4. The Mössbauer pattern of 1 exhibits a doublet site for diamagnetic (2–400 K) FeII. The compounds 1, 2 and 4 encompass interesting cyclic voltammetric responses involving FeII, FeIII and FeIV

Suzuki Polycondensation: Polyarylenes à la Carte

This review draws a rather comprehensive picture of how Suzuki polycondensation was discovered in 1989 and how it was subsequently developed into the most powerful polymerization method for polyarylenes during the last 20 years. It combines insights into synthetic issues with classes of polymers prepared and touches upon aspects of this method's technological importance. Because a significant part of the developmental work was carried out in industry, the present review makes reference to an unusually large number of patents

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

BackgroundSparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis.MethodsPROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850.FindingsBetween Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals.InterpretationOver 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function

Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial

Background: Sparsentan is a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin and angiotensin receptor antagonist being examined in an ongoing phase 3 trial in adults with IgA nephropathy. We report the prespecified interim analysis of the primary proteinuria efficacy endpoint, and safety. Methods: PROTECT is an international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled study, being conducted in 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. The study examines sparsentan versus irbesartan in adults (aged ≥18 years) with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of 1·0 g/day or higher despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment for at least 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sparsentan 400 mg once daily or irbesartan 300 mg once daily, stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate at screening (30 to 1·75 g/day). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 36 in urine protein-creatinine ratio based on a 24-h urine sample, assessed using mixed model repeated measures. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were safety endpoints. All endpoints were examined in all participants who received at least one dose of randomised treatment. The study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 404 participants were randomly assigned to sparsentan (n=202) or irbesartan (n=202) and received treatment. At week 36, the geometric least squares mean percent change from baseline in urine protein-creatinine ratio was statistically significantly greater in the sparsentan group (-49·8%) than the irbesartan group (-15·1%), resulting in a between-group relative reduction of 41% (least squares mean ratio=0·59; 95% CI 0·51-0·69; p<0·0001). TEAEs with sparsentan were similar to irbesartan. There were no cases of severe oedema, heart failure, hepatotoxicity, or oedema-related discontinuations. Bodyweight changes from baseline were not different between the sparsentan and irbesartan groups. Interpretation: Once-daily treatment with sparsentan produced meaningful reduction in proteinuria compared with irbesartan in adults with IgA nephropathy. Safety of sparsentan was similar to irbesartan. Future analyses after completion of the 2-year double-blind period will show whether these beneficial effects translate into a long-term nephroprotective potential of sparsentan. Funding: Travere Therapeutics

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. Methods PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. Interpretation Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function.</p