Human Monoclonal Antibody HCV1 Effectively Prevents and Treats HCV Infection in Chimpanzees

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a leading cause of liver transplantation and there is an urgent need to develop therapies to reduce rates of HCV infection of transplanted livers. Approved therapeutics for HCV are poorly tolerated and are of limited efficacy in this patient population. Human monoclonal antibody HCV1 recognizes a highly-conserved linear epitope of the HCV E2 envelope glycoprotein (amino acids 412-423) and neutralizes a broad range of HCV genotypes. In a chimpanzee model, a single dose of 250 mg/kg HCV1 delivered 30 minutes prior to infusion with genotype 1a H77 HCV provided complete protection from HCV infection, whereas a dose of 50 mg/kg HCV1 did not protect. In addition, an acutely-infected chimpanzee given 250 mg/kg HCV1 42 days following exposure to virus had a rapid reduction in viral load to below the limit of detection before rebounding 14 days later. The emergent virus displayed an E2 mutation (N415K/D) conferring resistance to HCV1 neutralization. Finally, three chronically HCV-infected chimpanzees were treated with a single dose of 40 mg/kg HCV1 and viral load was reduced to below the limit of detection for 21 days in one chimpanzee with rebounding virus displaying a resistance mutation (N417S). The other two chimpanzees had 0.5-1.0 log(10) reductions in viral load without evidence of viral resistance to HCV1. In vitro testing using HCV pseudovirus (HCVpp) demonstrated that the sera from the poorly-responding chimpanzees inhibited the ability of HCV1 to neutralize HCVpp. Measurement of antibody responses in the chronically-infected chimpanzees implicated endogenous antibody to E2 and interference with HCV1 neutralization although other factors may also be responsible. These data suggest that human monoclonal antibody HCV1 may be an effective therapeutic for the prevention of graft infection in HCV-infected patients undergoing liver transplantation

The professionalism disconnect: Do entering residents identify yet participate in unprofessional behaviors?

Background Professionalism has been an important tenet of medical education, yet defining it is a challenge. Perceptions of professional behavior may vary by individual, medical specialty, demographic group and institution. Understanding these differences should help institutions better clarify professionalism expectations and provide standards with which to evaluate resident behavior. Methods Duke University Hospital and Vidant Medical Center/East Carolina University surveyed entering PGY1 residents. Residents were queried on two issues: their perception of the professionalism of 46 specific behaviors related to training and patient care; and their own participation in those specified behaviors. The study reports data analyses for gender and institution based upon survey results in 2009 and 2010. The study received approval by the Institutional Review Boards of both institutions. Results 76% (375) of 495 PGY1 residents surveyed in 2009 and 2010 responded. A majority of responders rated all 46 specified behaviors as unprofessional, and a majority had either observed or participated in each behavior. For all 46 behaviors, a greater percentage of women rated the behaviors as unprofessional. Men were more likely than women to have participated in behaviors. There were several significant differences in both the perceptions of specified behaviors and in self-reported observation of and/or involvement in those behaviors between institutions. Respondents indicated the most important professionalism issues relevant to medical practice include: respect for colleagues/patients, relationships with pharmaceutical companies, balancing home/work life, and admitting mistakes. They reported that professionalism can best be assessed by peers, patients, observation of non-medical work and timeliness/detail of paperwork. Conclusion Defining professionalism in measurable terms is a challenge yet critical in order for it to be taught and assessed. Recognition of the differences by gender and institution should allow for tailored teaching and assessment of professionalism so that it is most meaningful. A shared understanding of what constitutes professional behavior is an important first step

Improving teaching on an inpatient pediatrics service: a retrospective analysis of a program change

Background: The traditional role of the faculty inpatient attending providing clinical care and effectively teaching residents and medical students is threatened by increasing documentation requirements, pressures to increase clinical productivity, and insufficient funding available for medical education. In order to sustain and improve clinical education on a general pediatric inpatient service, we instituted a comprehensive program change. Our program consisted of creating detailed job descriptions, setting clear expectations, and providing salary support for faculty inpatient attending physicians serving in clinical and educational roles. This study was aimed at assessing the impact of this program change on the learners’ perceptions of their faculty attending physicians and learners’ experiences on the inpatient rotations. Methods: We analyzed resident and medical student electronic evaluations of both clinical and teaching faculty attending physician characteristics, as well as resident evaluations of an inpatient rotation experience. We compared the proportions of “superior” ratings versus all other ratings prior to the educational intervention (2005–2006, baseline) with the two subsequent years post intervention (2006–2007, year 1; 2007–2008, year 2). We also compared medical student scores on a comprehensive National Board of Medical Examiners clinical subject examination pre and post intervention. Results: When compared to the baseline year, pediatric residents were more likely to rate as superior the quality of didactic teaching (OR=1.7 [1.0-2.8] year 1; OR=2.0 [1.1-3.5] year 2) and attendings’ appeal as a role model (OR=1.9 [1.1-3.3] year 2). Residents were also more likely to rate as superior the quality of feedback and evaluation they received from the attending (OR=2.1 [1.2-3.7] year 1; OR=3.9 [2.2-7.1] year 2). Similar improvements were also noted in medical student evaluations of faculty attendings. Most notably, medical students were significantly more likely to rate feedback on their data gathering and physical examination skills as superior (OR=4.2 [2.0-8.6] year 1; OR=6.4 [3.0-13.6] year 2). Conclusions: A comprehensive program which includes clear role descriptions along with faculty expectations, as well as salary support for faculty in clinical and educational roles, can improve resident and medical student experiences on a general pediatric inpatient service. The authors provide sufficient detail to replicate this program to other settings.JH Libraries Open Access Promotion Fun