Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment

Brigatinib causes tumor shrinkage in both NF2-deficient meningioma and schwannoma through inhibition of multiple tyrosine kinases but not ALK

Neurofibromatosis Type 2 (NF2) is an autosomal dominant genetic syndrome caused by mutations in the NF2 tumor suppressor gene resulting in multiple schwannomas and meningiomas. There are no FDA approved therapies for these tumors and their relentless progression results in high rates of morbidity and mortality. Through a combination of high throughput screens, preclinical in vivo modeling, and evaluation of the kinome en masse, we identified actionable drug targets and efficacious experimental therapeutics for the treatment of NF2 related schwannomas and meningiomas. These efforts identified brigatinib (ALUNBRIG®), an FDA-approved inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases including ALK, to be a potent inhibitor of tumor growth in established NF2 deficient xenograft meningiomas and a genetically engineered murine model of spontaneous NF2 schwannomas. Surprisingly, neither meningioma nor schwannoma cells express ALK. Instead, we demonstrate that brigatinib inhibited multiple tyrosine kinases, including EphA2, Fer and focal adhesion kinase 1 (FAK1). These data demonstrate the power of the de novo unbiased approach for drug discovery and represents a major step forward in the advancement of therapeutics for the treatment of NF2 related malignancies

Neptune Odyssey: A Flagship Concept for the Exploration of the Neptune–Triton System

The Neptune Odyssey mission concept is a Flagship-class orbiter and atmospheric probe to the Neptune-Triton system. This bold mission of exploration would orbit an ice-giant planet to study the planet, its rings, small satellites, space environment, and the planet-sized moon Triton. Triton is a captured dwarf planet from the Kuiper Belt, twin of Pluto, and likely ocean world. Odyssey addresses Neptune system-level science, with equal priorities placed on Neptune, its rings, moons, space environment, and Triton. Between Uranus and Neptune, the latter is unique in providing simultaneous access to both an ice giant and a Kuiper Belt dwarf planet. The spacecraft - in a class equivalent to the NASA/ESA/ASI Cassini spacecraft - would launch by 2031 on a Space Launch System or equivalent launch vehicle and utilize a Jupiter gravity assist for a 12 yr cruise to Neptune and a 4 yr prime orbital mission; alternatively a launch after 2031 would have a 16 yr direct-to-Neptune cruise phase. Our solution provides annual launch opportunities and allows for an easy upgrade to the shorter (12 yr) cruise. Odyssey would orbit Neptune retrograde (prograde with respect to Triton), using the moon's gravity to shape the orbital tour and allow coverage of Triton, Neptune, and the space environment. The atmospheric entry probe would descend in ~37 minutes to the 10 bar pressure level in Neptune's atmosphere just before Odyssey's orbit-insertion engine burn. Odyssey's mission would end by conducting a Cassini-like "Grand Finale,"passing inside the rings and ultimately taking a final great plunge into Neptune's atmosphere

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

In utero exposure to antiretroviral therapy: feasibility of long-term follow-up.

Most uninfected children born to diagnosed HIV-infected women in the United Kingdom (UK) are exposed to antiretroviral therapy (ART) in utero and neonatally, and concerns exist about potential adverse effects of such exposure. We explored the feasibility of using national clinic-based follow-up to investigate the association between ART exposure and adverse health events occurring after the neonatal period. Active surveillance of obstetric and paediatric HIV infection is conducted through the National Study of HIV in Pregnancy and Childhood (NSHPC). Between 2002 and 2005, health professionals enrolled previously notified uninfected children in a consented follow-up study (the CHildren exposed to AntiRetroviral Therapy (CHART) study). Follow-up information was collected opportunistically using a standard questionnaire. Of 2104 eligible uninfected children born in the UK between 1996 and 2004, 704 (33.5%) were enrolled in CHART; parents of 4.8% (100/2104) declined, 2.8% (59/2104) had gone abroad, 21.6% (455/2104) were not contactable, and the remaining 37.3% (786/2104) were not enrolled mainly because of lack of clinic resources or unwillingness of health professionals to approach the families. Demographic characteristics and type of ART exposure for enrolled and non-enrolled children were similar. Latest information on enrolled children was available at a median age of 24 months. Minor childhood ailments were reported in the majority of children, febrile seizures in 1.6% (11/704), and major health problems in 3.8% (27/704). It was reassuring that prevalence of these outcomes was within UK norms, but numbers were small and duration of follow-up was limited. The difficulties encountered in enrolling and retaining children in this study indicate that comprehensive clinic-based follow-up of ART-exposed uninfected children is not practical. Alternative approaches are required; a robust, secure data linkage protocol would provide a more feasible and sustainable system for long-term monitoring of in utero ART exposure

Sejarah Seni Rupa: Sebuah Petunjuk Studi

Buku ini merupakan kelanjutan terjemahan dengan judul yang sama. Judul Asli buku ini adalah Art History: A Study Guide. Kelanjutan terjemahan ini diawali dengan membahas seni rupa dari berbagai negara dengan sudut pandang tujuan dan pokok penggambaran, media dan teknik serta desai

Sejarah Seni Rupa : Sebuah Petunjuk Studi (lanjutan)

Buku ini diterbitkan guna memenuhi kebutuhan akan buku ajar bidang seni rupa. Isi buku merupakan kelanjutan terjemahan yang telah dilakukan sebelumnya dari buku berjudul "Art History : A study guide" tulisan Janet Fuller Masters dan Joyce McKean Smith. Isi buku merupakan bab 17 yang membahas seni rupa dari berbagai negara dan dilanjutkan pada bab 18 yang membahas seni rupa abad-20