Antinematodic effect of Enterococcus faecalis CECT7121 using Trichinella spiralis as a model of nematode infection in mice

Nematode infections affect a significant percentage of the human population worldwide, especially in developing countries. There are a small number of drugs available to treat these infections, with variable outcomes. Therefore, the potential use of probiotics to help control parasitic infections has emerged as a suitable option. The main goal of this work was to assess the antinematodic effect of the probiotic Enterococcus faecalis CECT7121 (EFCECT7121) in vitro and in vivo, using Trichinella spiralis as a nematode model of infection. The in vitro assay showed a reduction in T. spiralis larvae viability of 31.6% when compared with the control group (6.3%) after 48 h incubation with EFCECT7121. Nevertheless, the isolated antimicrobial peptide AP7121 when inoculated at different concentrations did not reveal any larvicidal effect. Different EFCECT7121 treatment schemes in mice were evaluated, and the reduction of the enteral and parenteral burden of T. spiralis was determined. In addition, the protective effect of EFCECT7121 combined with the conventional anthelmintic albendazole (ABZ, 5 mg/kg) was also assessed. The oral administration of EFCECT7121 previous T. spiralis infection produced a reduction in the larvae per gram (LPG) of mice muscle tissue ranging from 32.8 to 47.9% on the 28th day post-infection. ABZ alone and the combination EFCECT7121 + ABZ produced a reduction of the LPG of muscle tissue of 62 and 60.7%, respectively. Results obtained in the current work support the hypothesis that probiotics such as EFCECT7121 have an antinematodic effect, and their combination with conventional anthelmintic drugs may result useful for improving clinical and parasitological outcomes.Fil: Schofs, Laureano. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tandil. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Gobernación. Comision de Investigaciones Científicas. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil; ArgentinaFil: Sparo, Mónica Delfina. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud. Departamento de Clínica; ArgentinaFil: de Yaniz, María Guadalupe. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tandil. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Gobernación. Comision de Investigaciones Científicas. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil; ArgentinaFil: Lissarrague, Sabina. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud. Departamento de Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Dominguez, Maria Paula. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tandil. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Gobernación. Comision de Investigaciones Científicas. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil; ArgentinaFil: Alvarez, Luis Ignacio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tandil. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Gobernación. Comision de Investigaciones Científicas. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil; ArgentinaFil: Sanchez Bruni, Sergio Fabian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tandil. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Gobernación. Comision de Investigaciones Científicas. Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil; Argentin

The Charlotte Project: Recommendations for patient-reported outcomes and clinical parameters in Dravet syndrome through a qualitative and Delphi consensus study

Objective: The appropriate management of patients with Dravet Syndrome (DS) is challenging, given the severity of symptoms and the burden of the disease for patients and caregivers. This study aimed to identify, through a qualitative methodology and a Delphi consensus-driven process, a set of recommendations for the management of DS to guide clinicians in the assessment of the clinical condition and quality of life (QoL) of DS patients, with a special focus on patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods: This study was conducted in five phases, led by a multidisciplinary scientific committee (SC) including pediatric neurologists, epileptologists, a neuropsychologist, an epilepsy nurse, and members of DS patient advocates. In phases 1 and 2, a questionnaire related to patients’ QoL was prepared and answered by caregivers and the SC. In phase 3, the SC generated, based on these answers and on a focus group discussion, a 70-item Delphi questionnaire, covering six topic categories on a nine-point Likert scale. In phase 4, 32 panelists, from dierent Spanish institutions and with a multidisciplinary background, answered the questionnaire. Consensus was obtained and defined as strong or moderate if ≥80% and 67–79% of panelists, respectively, rated the statement with ≥7. Phase 5 consisted of the preparation of the manuscript. Results: The panelists agreed on a total of 69 items (98.6%), 54 (77.14%), and 15 (21.43%) with strong and moderate consensus, respectively. Frontiers in Neurology 01 frontiersin.or Aledo-Serrano et al. 10.3389/fneur.2022.975034 The experts’ recommendations included the need for frequent assessment of patient and caregivers QoL parameters. The experts agreed that QoL should be assessed through specific questionnaires covering dierent domains. Likewise, the results showed consensus regarding the regular evaluation of several clinical parameters related to neurodevelopment, attention, behavior, other comorbidities, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). A consensus was also reached on the instruments, specific parameters, and caregivers’ education in the routine clinical management of patients with DS. Conclusions: This consensus resulted in a set of recommendations for the assessment of clinical and QoL parameters, including PROs, related to the general evaluation of QoL, neurodevelopment, attention, behavior, other comorbidities aecting QoL, SUDEP, and QoL of caregivers/relatives and patients with D

EMA and EFSA Joint Scientific Opinion on measures to reduce the need to use antimicrobial agents in animal husbandry in the European Union, and the resulting impacts on food safety (RONAFA)

EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase out most preventive use of antimicrobials and to reduce and refine metaphylaxis by applying recognised alternative measures