Optimization of Time-Course Experiments for Kinetic Model Discrimination

Systems biology relies heavily on the construction of quantitative models of biochemical networks. These models must have predictive power to help unveiling the underlying molecular mechanisms of cellular physiology, but it is also paramount that they are consistent with the data resulting from key experiments. Often, it is possible to find several models that describe the data equally well, but provide significantly different quantitative predictions regarding particular variables of the network. In those cases, one is faced with a problem of model discrimination, the procedure of rejecting inappropriate models from a set of candidates in order to elect one as the best model to use for prediction

2 nd Brazilian Consensus on Chagas Disease, 2015

Abstract Chagas disease is a neglected chronic condition with a high burden of morbidity and mortality. It has considerable psychological, social, and economic impacts. The disease represents a significant public health issue in Brazil, with different regional patterns. This document presents the evidence that resulted in the Brazilian Consensus on Chagas Disease. The objective was to review and standardize strategies for diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and control of Chagas disease in the country, based on the available scientific evidence. The consensus is based on the articulation and strategic contribution of renowned Brazilian experts with knowledge and experience on various aspects of the disease. It is the result of a close collaboration between the Brazilian Society of Tropical Medicine and the Ministry of Health. It is hoped that this document will strengthen the development of integrated actions against Chagas disease in the country, focusing on epidemiology, management, comprehensive care (including families and communities), communication, information, education, and research

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Heel-rise test in the assessment of individuals with peripheral arterial occlusive disease

D&amp;eacute;bora Pantuso Monteiro,1 Raquel Rodrigues Britto,2 Ana Clara Ribeiro Lages,3 Marluce Lopes Bas&amp;iacute;lio,3 Monize Cristine de Oliveira Pires,3 Maria Luiza Vieira Carvalho,1 Ricardo Jayme Proc&amp;oacute;pio,4 Danielle Aparecida Gomes Pereira21Rehabilitation Sciences of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte-MG, Brazil; 2Physiotherapy Department of the School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte-MG, Brazil; 3Private Practice, Belo Horizonte-MG, Brazil; 4Hospital das Cl&amp;iacute;nicas of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte-MG, BrazilIntroduction: The Heel-Rise Test (HRT) is a clinical instrument relevant to vascular rehabilitation that has been proposed to assess the function of the triceps surae muscle. To use HRT in the assessment of individuals with peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD), its ability to detect differences in the functional performance of patients with PAOD must be verified.Aim: To verify whether the test is sensitive in differentiating between individuals with PAOD with distinct functional capacities.Materials and methods: A transversal study in which individuals with PAOD were assessed using the HRT, the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ), and the Shuttle Walk Test. The following variables were analyzed: number of plantar flexions performed in the HRT (time in seconds) and velocity (plantar flexions per second) when performing plantar flexions up to the point of volunteer fatigue, maximum distance walked in the Shuttle Walk Test, and scores obtained in each WIQ domain.Results: Twenty-five individuals (14 male) were included in the study, with a mean age of 63.36 &amp;plusmn; 9.83 years. The variables number of plantar flexions and time to perform the HRT were sensitive enough to differentiate between distinct functional capacities in individuals with PAOD (P = 0.003 and P = 0.009, respectively). However, this result was not found for the variable of velocity in the HRT. The number of plantar flexions in the HRT was sensitive enough to differentiate individuals of extreme classes on the WIQ domain, stairs (P = 0.008).Conclusion: The HRT can be applied in clinical practice as a valid assessment of the distinct function capacities of individuals with PAOD.Keywords: peripheral arterial disease, heel-rise test, walking impairment questionnaire, functional capacity, shuttle walk tes