Bayesian signaling game based efficient security model for MANETs

Game Theory acts as a suitable tool offering promising solutions to security-related concerns in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (i.e., MANETs). In MANETs, security forms a prominent concern as it includes nodes which are usually portable and require significant coordination between them. Further, the absence of physical organisation makes such networks susceptible to security breaches, hindering secure routing and execution among nodes. Game Theory approach has been manipulated in the current study to achieve an analytical view while addressing the security concerns in MANETs. This paper offers a Bayesian-Signaling game model capable of analysing the behaviour associated with regular as well as malicious nodes. In the proposed model, the utility of normal nodes has been increased while reducing the utility linked to malicious nodes. Moreover, the system employs a reputation system capable of stimulating best cooperation between the nodes. The regular nodes record incessantly to examine their corresponding nodes’ behaviours by using the belief system of Bayes-rules. On its comparison with existing schemes, it was revealed that the presented algorithm provides better identification of malicious nodes and attacks while delivering improved throughput and reduced false positive rate

Mobile Genetic Element-Encoded Cytolysin Connects Virulence to Methicillin Resistance in MRSA

Bacterial virulence and antibiotic resistance have a significant influence on disease severity and treatment options during bacterial infections. Frequently, the underlying genetic determinants are encoded on mobile genetic elements (MGEs). In the leading human pathogen Staphylococcus aureus, MGEs that contain antibiotic resistance genes commonly do not contain genes for virulence determinants. The phenol-soluble modulins (PSMs) are staphylococcal cytolytic toxins with a crucial role in immune evasion. While all known PSMs are core genome-encoded, we here describe a previously unidentified psm gene, psm-mec, within the staphylococcal methicillin resistance-encoding MGE SCCmec. PSM-mec was strongly expressed in many strains and showed the physico-chemical, pro-inflammatory, and cytolytic characteristics typical of PSMs. Notably, in an S. aureus strain with low production of core genome-encoded PSMs, expression of PSM-mec had a significant impact on immune evasion and disease. In addition to providing high-level resistance to methicillin, acquisition of SCCmec elements encoding PSM-mec by horizontal gene transfer may therefore contribute to staphylococcal virulence by substituting for the lack of expression of core genome-encoded PSMs. Thus, our study reveals a previously unknown role of methicillin resistance clusters in staphylococcal pathogenesis and shows that important virulence and antibiotic resistance determinants may be combined in staphylococcal MGEs

Study protocol of DIVERGE, the first genetic epidemiological study of major depressive disorder in Pakistan

INTRODUCTION: Globally, 80% of the burdenof major depressive disorder (MDD) pertains to low- and middle-income countries. Research into genetic and environmental risk factors has the potential to uncover disease mechanisms that may contribute to better diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, yet has so far been largely limited to participants with European ancestry from high-income countries. The DIVERGE study was established to help overcome this gap and investigate genetic and environmental risk factors for MDD in Pakistan. METHODS: DIVERGE aims to enrol 9000 cases and 4000 controls in hospitals across the country. Here, we provide the rationale for DIVERGE, describe the study protocol and characterise the sample using data from the first 500cases. Exploratory data analysis is performed to describe demographics, socioeconomic status, environmental risk factors, family history of mental illness and psychopathology. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Many participants had severe depression with 74% of patients who experienced multiple depressive episodes. It was a common practice to seek help for mental health struggles from faith healers and religious leaders. Socioeconomic variables reflected the local context with a large proportion of women not having access to any education and the majority of participants reporting no savings. CONCLUSION: DIVERGE is a carefully designed case-control study of MDD in Pakistan that captures diverse risk factors. As the largest genetic study in Pakistan, DIVERGE helps address the severe underrepresentation of people from South Asian countries in genetic as well as psychiatric research

Outcomes of WHO-conforming, longer, all-oral multidrug-resistant TB regimens and analysis implications

BACKGROUND: Evidence of the effectiveness of the WHO-recommended design of longer individualized regimens for multidrug- or rifampicin-resistant TB (MDR/RR-TB) is limited.OBJECTIVES: To report end-of-treatment outcomes for MDR/RR-TB patients from a 2015-2018 multi-country cohort that received a regimen consistent with current 2022 WHO updated recommendations and describe the complexities of comparing regimens.METHODS: We analyzed a subset of participants from the endTB Observational Study who initiated a longer MDR/RR-TB regimen that was consistent with subsequent 2022 WHO guidance on regimen design for longer treatments. We excluded individuals who received an injectable agent or who received fewer than four likely effective drugs.RESULTS: Of the 759 participants analyzed, 607 (80.0%, 95% CI 77.0-82.7) experienced successful end-of-treatment outcomes. The frequency of success was high across groups, whether stratified on number of Group A drugs or fluoroquinolone resistance, and ranged from 72.1% to 90.0%. Regimens were highly variable regarding composition and the duration of individual drugs.CONCLUSIONS: Longer, all-oral, individualized regimens that were consistent with 2022 WHO guidance on regimen design had high frequencies of treatment success. Heterogeneous regimen compositions and drug durations precluded meaningful comparisons. Future research should examine which combinations of drugs maximize safety/tolerability and effectiveness

Study protocol of DIVERGE, the first genetic epidemiological study of major depressive disorder in Pakistan.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, 80% of the burdenof major depressive disorder (MDD) pertains to low- and middle-income countries. Research into genetic and environmental risk factors has the potential to uncover disease mechanisms that may contribute to better diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, yet has so far been largely limited to participants with European ancestry from high-income countries. The DIVERGE study was established to help overcome this gap and investigate genetic and environmental risk factors for MDD in Pakistan. METHODS: DIVERGE aims to enrol 9000 cases and 4000 controls in hospitals across the country. Here, we provide the rationale for DIVERGE, describe the study protocol and characterise the sample using data from the first 500 cases. Exploratory data analysis is performed to describe demographics, socioeconomic status, environmental risk factors, family history of mental illness and psychopathology. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Many participants had severe depression with 74% of patients who experienced multiple depressive episodes. It was a common practice to seek help for mental health struggles from faith healers and religious leaders. Socioeconomic variables reflected the local context with a large proportion of women not having access to any education and the majority of participants reporting no savings. CONCLUSION: DIVERGE is a carefully designed case-control study of MDD in Pakistan that captures diverse risk factors. As the largest genetic study in Pakistan, DIVERGE helps address the severe underrepresentation of people from South Asian countries in genetic as well as psychiatric research

The global burden of cancer attributable to risk factors, 2010-19 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Understanding the magnitude of cancer burden attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors is crucial for development of effective prevention and mitigation strategies. We analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 to inform cancer control planning efforts globally. Methods The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate cancer burden attributable to behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risk factors. A total of 82 risk-outcome pairs were included on the basis of the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Estimated cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2019 and change in these measures between 2010 and 2019 are presented. Findings Globally, in 2019, the risk factors included in this analysis accounted for 4.45 million (95% uncertainty interval 4.01-4.94) deaths and 105 million (95.0-116) DALYs for both sexes combined, representing 44.4% (41.3-48.4) of all cancer deaths and 42.0% (39.1-45.6) of all DALYs. There were 2.88 million (2.60-3.18) risk-attributable cancer deaths in males (50.6% [47.8-54.1] of all male cancer deaths) and 1.58 million (1.36-1.84) risk-attributable cancer deaths in females (36.3% [32.5-41.3] of all female cancer deaths). The leading risk factors at the most detailed level globally for risk-attributable cancer deaths and DALYs in 2019 for both sexes combined were smoking, followed by alcohol use and high BMI. Risk-attributable cancer burden varied by world region and Socio-demographic Index (SDI), with smoking, unsafe sex, and alcohol use being the three leading risk factors for risk-attributable cancer DALYs in low SDI locations in 2019, whereas DALYs in high SDI locations mirrored the top three global risk factor rankings. From 2010 to 2019, global risk-attributable cancer deaths increased by 20.4% (12.6-28.4) and DALYs by 16.8% (8.8-25.0), with the greatest percentage increase in metabolic risks (34.7% [27.9-42.8] and 33.3% [25.8-42.0]). Interpretation The leading risk factors contributing to global cancer burden in 2019 were behavioural, whereas metabolic risk factors saw the largest increases between 2010 and 2019. Reducing exposure to these modifiable risk factors would decrease cancer mortality and DALY rates worldwide, and policies should be tailored appropriately to local cancer risk factor burden. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.Peer reviewe

Global investments in pandemic preparedness and COVID-19: development assistance and domestic spending on health between 1990 and 2026

Background The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted gaps in health surveillance systems, disease prevention, and treatment globally. Among the many factors that might have led to these gaps is the issue of the financing of national health systems, especially in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as a robust global system for pandemic preparedness. We aimed to provide a comparative assessment of global health spending at the onset of the pandemic; characterise the amount of development assistance for pandemic preparedness and response disbursed in the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic; and examine expectations for future health spending and put into context the expected need for investment in pandemic preparedness. Methods In this analysis of global health spending between 1990 and 2021, and prediction from 2021 to 2026, we estimated four sources of health spending: development assistance for health (DAH), government spending, out-of-pocket spending, and prepaid private spending across 204 countries and territories. We used the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)'s Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the WHO Global Health Expenditure Database (GHED) to estimate spending. We estimated development assistance for general health, COVID-19 response, and pandemic preparedness and response using a keyword search. Health spending estimates were combined with estimates of resources needed for pandemic prevention and preparedness to analyse future health spending patterns, relative to need. Findings In 2019, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, US$9·2 trillion (95$7·3 trillion (95% UI 7·2–7·4) in 2019; 293·7 times the $24·8 billion (95$43·1 billion in development assistance was provided to maintain or improve health. The pandemic led to an unprecedented increase in development assistance targeted towards health; in 2020 and 2021, $1·8 billion in DAH contributions was provided towards pandemic preparedness in LMICs, and$37·8 billion was provided for the health-related COVID-19 response. Although the support for pandemic preparedness is 12·2% of the recommended target by the High-Level Independent Panel (HLIP), the support provided for the health-related COVID-19 response is 252·2% of the recommended target. Additionally, projected spending estimates suggest that between 2022 and 2026, governments in 17 (95% UI 11–21) of the 137 LMICs will observe an increase in national government health spending equivalent to an addition of 1% of GDP, as recommended by the HLIP. Interpretation There was an unprecedented scale-up in DAH in 2020 and 2021. We have a unique opportunity at this time to sustain funding for crucial global health functions, including pandemic preparedness. However, historical patterns of underfunding of pandemic preparedness suggest that deliberate effort must be made to ensure funding is maintained

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