An examination of Indiana Early College High School students who attended Purdue University between 2006 and 2015

Early College High Schools (ECHS) are an educational intervention designed to promote rigor in high school education along with increased post-secondary access and success for disadvantaged students. Based on evidence, the Early College High School program is effective at helping students who traditionally are not in college-bound tracks find their way into that path. ECHSs provide a comprehensive, rigorous high school experience allowing students to earn an associate’s degree along with the high school diploma. Regarding structure, the ECHS is an entire high school, with all students earning college credits. Examining post-secondary experiences of students participating in Early College High School programming is necessary to understand the full impacts of this phenomenon. To date, no studies have done so. This work begins the process by describing outcomes and experiences of students from seven endorsed Early College High Schools in Indiana who chose to attend Purdue University between the years of 2006 and 2015. Because little is known about the post-secondary experiences of ECHS students, this study is a non-experimental sequential mixed methods study that uses descriptive and process analytical methods. Success of the ECHS intervention in the high school domain is well documented. Analysis of the outcomes of the intervention in the post-secondary domain is vital to determine a complete assessment of the ECHS programming. his study examined post-secondary choices and factors that impact two outcomes, time-to-degree and graduation rate, for the 2006-2011 cohort and 2012-2015 cohort. Time to degree was defined as number of semesters needed to earn the first baccalaureate degree, with timely graduation being within six years, and graduation rate had four categories: graduated, voluntarily withdrawn, dropped by the university, and enrolled still persisting to graduation. Four factors that influence outcomes were selected because of their potential impact of time-to-degree and graduation rate. The four factors were demographic information (gender and race/ethnicity), readiness for college defined by SAT/ACT scores, and change of degree option (CODO). This information is compared to the Purdue cohort matriculating at the same time to provide comparison to the typical Purdue student. In addition to secondary data obtained from the Office of the Registrar, a survey was administered to ECHS students on campus. The survey questioned students’ sense of preparation and benefit from the ECHS for the Purdue experience. Individual interviews were held to gain personal insights into perceptions of preparation and benefits of the Early College High School program on the Purdue experience. The mixed method approach provided greater strength to the study by providing answers to questions raised in student secondary data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). For example, why did ECHS students elect to stay longer when they were able to graduate earlier due to earned credits prior to matriculation? Results showed that the Indiana ECHS schools in this study sent students to Purdue University that were able to graduate at approximately the same rates and times as traditional Purdue students. These ECHS students did not change majors nearly as often as their Purdue peers. While SAT scores showed ECHS students not as perhaps college ready as the typical Purdue student in the same cohort, graduation rate performance indicates that was not a hindrance to success at Purdue. A growing body of literature supports the positive effects of the program at the high school level. This small study fills a gap by identifying the positive effects of Indiana ECHS programming at the post-secondary level and provides four recommendations to the Early College High School leadership for increasing student success at universities similar to Purdue

Linking Power Doppler Ultrasound to the Presence of Th17 Cells in the Rheumatoid Arthritis Joint

Power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) is increasingly used to assess synovitis in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Prior studies have shown correlations between PDUS scores and vessel counts, but relationships with T cell immunopathology have not been described.PBMC were isolated from healthy controls (HC) or RA patients and stimulated ex vivo with PMA and ionomycin for 3 hours in the presence of Golgistop. Paired synovial fluid (SF) or synovial tissue (ST) were analysed where available. Intracellular expression of IL-17, IFNgamma, and TNFalpha by CD4+ T cells was determined by flow cytometry. Synovial blood flow was evaluated by PDUS signal at the knees, wrists and metacarpophalangeal joints of RA patients. Serum, SF and fibroblast culture supernatant levels of vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A) were measured by ELISA. The frequency of IL17+IFNgamma-CD4+ T cells (Th17 cells) was significantly elevated in peripheral blood (PB) from RA patients vs. HC (median (IQR) 0.5 (0.28-1.59)% vs. 0.32 (0.21-0.54)%, p = 0.005). Th17 cells were further enriched (mean 6.6-fold increase) in RA SF relative to RA PB. Patients with active disease had a higher percentage of IL-17+ T cells in ST than patients in remission, suggesting a possible role for Th17 cells in active synovitis in RA. Indeed, the percentage of Th17 cells, but not Th1, in SF positively correlated with CRP (r = 0.51, p = 0.04) and local PDUS-defined synovitis (r = 0.61, p = 0.002). Furthermore, patients with high levels of IL-17+CD4+ T cells in SF had increased levels of the angiogenic factor VEGF-A in SF. Finally, IL-17, but not IFNgamma, increased VEGF-A production by RA synovial fibroblasts in vitro.Our data demonstrate a link between the presence of pro-inflammatory Th17 cells in SF and local PDUS scores, and offer a novel immunological explanation for the observation that rapid joint damage progression occurs in patients with persistent positive PDUS signal

Serious adverse events reported in placebo randomised controlled trials of oral naltrexone: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Naltrexone is an opioid antagonist used in many different conditions, both licensed and unlicensed. It is used at widely varying doses from 3 - 250 mg. The aim of this review was to evaluate the safety of oral naltrexone by examining the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of naltrexone compared to placebo. Methods A systematic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, other databases and clinical trials registries was undertaken up to March 2018. Parallel placebo-controlled RCTs longer than 4 weeks published after 1/1/2001, of oral naltrexone at any dose were selected. Any condition and age group were included, excluding only studies for opioid or ex-opioid users, due to possible opioid/opioid antagonist interactions. The systematic review used the guidance of the Cochrane Handbook throughout. Numerical data was independently extracted by two people and cross-checked. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15 and R, using random and fixed effects models throughout. Results Eighty-nine RCTs with 11194 participants were found, studying alcohol use disorders, various psychiatric disorders, impulse control disorders, other addictions, obesity, Crohn’s disease, fibromyalgia and cancers. Twenty-six studies (4,960 participants) recorded SAEs occurring by arm of study. There was no evidence of increased risk of SAEs for naltrexone compared to placebo, relative risk (RR) 0.84 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.06). Sensitivity analyses pooling risk differences supported this conclusion (RD = -0.01 (-0.02, 0.00)) and subgroup analyses showed that results were consistent across different doses and disease groups. The quality of evidence for this outcome was judged high using the GRADE criteria. Conclusions Naltrexone does not appear to increase the risk of SAEs over placebo. These findings confirm the safety of naltrexone when used in licensed indications and encourage investments to undertake efficacy studies in unlicensed indications

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes

HLA-DQA1*05 carriage associated with development of anti-drug antibodies to infliximab and adalimumab in patients with Crohn's Disease

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies are the most widely used biologic drugs for treating immune-mediated diseases, but repeated administration can induce the formation of anti-drug antibodies. The ability to identify patients at increased risk for development of anti-drug antibodies would facilitate selection of therapy and use of preventative strategies.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on Publisher URL to access the full-text

Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown

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

Large-Scale PV Integration Study

This research effort evaluates the impact of large-scale photovoltaic (PV) and distributed generation (DG) output on NV Energy’s electric grid system in southern Nevada. It analyzes the ability of NV Energy’s generation to accommodate increasing amounts of utility-scale PV and DG, and the resulting cost of integrating variable renewable resources. The study was jointly funded by the United States Department of Energy and NV Energy, and conducted by a project team comprised of industry experts and research scientists from Navigant Consulting Inc., Sandia National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and NV Energy