81 research outputs found
Genital verruciform xanthoma: lessons from a contemporary multiâinstitutional series
Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163435/2/his14198.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163435/1/his14198_am.pd
Comparison of published orthopaedic trauma trials following registration in Clinicaltrials.gov
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>After the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997, the registration of all clinical trials became mandatory prior to publication. Our primary objective was to determine publication rates for orthopaedic trauma trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. We further evaluated methodological consistency between registration and publication.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We searched Clinical Trials.gov for all trials related to orthopaedic trauma. We excluded active trials and trials not completed by July 2009, and performed a systematic search for publications resulting from registered closed trials. Information regarding primary and secondary outcomes, intervention, study sponsors, and sample size were extracted from registrations and publications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 130 closed trials, 37 eligible trials resulted in 16 publications (43.2%). We found no significant differences in publication rates between funding sources for industry sponsored studies and nongovernment/nonindustry sponsored studies (<it>p </it>> 0.05). About half the trials (45%) did not include the NCT ID in the publication. Two (10%) publications had major changes to the primary outcome measure and ten (52.6%) to sample size.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Registration of orthopaedic trauma trials does not consistently result in publication. When trials are registered, many do not cite NCT ID in the publication. Furthermore, changes that are not reflected in the registry of the trial are frequently made to the final publication.</p
Molecular Modeling-Based Evaluation of hTLR10 and Identification of Potential Ligands in Toll-Like Receptor Signaling
Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are pattern recognition receptors that recognize pathogens based on distinct molecular signatures. The human (h)TLR1, 2, 6 and 10 belong to the hTLR1 subfamilies, which are localized in the extracellular regions and activated in response to diverse ligand molecules. Due to the unavailability of the hTLR10 crystal structure, the understanding of its homo and heterodimerization with hTLR2 and hTLR1 and the ligand responsible for its activation is limited. To improve our understanding of the TLR10 receptor-ligand interaction, we used homology modeling to construct a three dimensional (3D) structure of hTLR10 and refined the model through molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. We utilized the optimized structures for the molecular docking in order to identify the potential site of interactions between the homo and heterodimer (hTLR10/2 and hTLR10/1). The docked complexes were then used for interaction with ligands (Pam3CSK4 and PamCysPamSK4) using MOE-Dock and ASEDock. Our docking studies have shown the binding orientations of hTLR10 heterodimer to be similar with other TLR2 family members. However, the binding orientation of hTLR10 homodimer is different from the heterodimer due to the presence of negative charged surfaces at the LRR11-14, thereby providing a specific cavity for ligand binding. Moreover, the multiple protein-ligand docking approach revealed that Pam3CSK4 might be the ligand for the hTLR10/2 complex and PamCysPamSK4, a di-acylated peptide, might activate hTLR10/1 hetero and hTLR10 homodimer. Therefore, the current modeled complexes can be a useful tool for further experimental studies on TLR biology
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK âAlert Level 4â phase of the B-MaP-C study
From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-08-11, rev-recd 2020-12-04, accepted 2020-12-10, registration 2020-12-11, pub-electronic 2021-03-25, online 2021-03-25, pub-print 2021-05-25Publication status: PublishedAbstract: 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 âstandardâ or âCOVID-alteredâ, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had âCOVID-alteredâ management. âBridgingâ 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 2â9%) using âNHS Predictâ. 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 âCOVID-alteredâ 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
Recommended from our members
Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01378-
Recommended from our members
Publisher Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: Outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study
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 âstandardâ or âCOVID-alteredâ, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had âCOVID-alteredâ management. âBridgingâ endocrine therapy was used (nâ=â951) 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 (nâ=â299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (nâ=â81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2â9%) using âNHS Predictâ. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (nâ=â781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of âCOVID-alteredâ 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
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK âAlert Level 4â 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 âstandardâ or âCOVID-alteredâ, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had âCOVID-alteredâ management. âBridgingâ 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 2â9%) using âNHS Predictâ. 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 âCOVID-alteredâ 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
Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK âAlert Level 4â phase of the B-MaP-C study
From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: registration 2021-03-26, online 2021-04-12, pub-electronic 2021-04-12, pub-print 2021-08-31Publication status: PublishedA Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01378-
- âŠ