Jeux péritextuels : "Quel petit vélo à guidon chromé au fond de la cour?" de Georges Perec

Chez Perec, style, techniques narratives, règles génériques deviennent prétexte au ludique. Toutefois, se jouer des conventions littéraires suppose qu'elles sont familières au lecteur. Or, s'il sait reconnaître les conventions du récit fictif traditionnel, sait-il toujours identifier les entorses qui y sont faites? Il faut que les jeux proposés se présentent ouvertement. Dans Quel petit vélo , le jeu commence par la remise en cause des fonctions et des conventions du péritexte (défini par Genette comme les éléments « situés autour du texte mais dans l'espace du même volume ») et jette une nouvelle lumière sur les possibilités du livre en tant que production et objet de consommation.In Perec's writing, style, narrative techniques, generic rules are always conducing to the ludic purpose of the author. Yet, playing with literary conventions assumes familiarity with these on the part of the reader. Now, if he can recognize the conventions of traditional narrative fiction, does it follow that he will also identify the dislocations done to them? It is necessary that the games proposed by the text should be overtly presented. In Quel petit vélo the game begins by questioning the functioning and conventions of what Genette defines as the "peritext" (those elements "situated around the text but within the book") and sheds new light on the possibilities of the book as both production and article of consumption

Evaluation of qPCR-Based Assays for Leprosy Diagnosis Directly in Clinical Specimens

The increased reliability and efficiency of the quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) makes it a promising tool for performing large-scale screening for infectious disease among high-risk individuals. To date, no study has evaluated the specificity and sensitivity of different qPCR assays for leprosy diagnosis using a range of clinical samples that could bias molecular results such as difficult-to-diagnose cases. In this study, qPCR assays amplifying different M. leprae gene targets, sodA, 16S rRNA, RLEP and Ag 85B were compared for leprosy differential diagnosis. qPCR assays were performed on frozen skin biopsy samples from a total of 62 patients: 21 untreated multibacillary (MB), 26 untreated paucibacillary (PB) leprosy patients, as well as 10 patients suffering from other dermatological diseases and 5 healthy donors. To develop standardized protocols and to overcome the bias resulted from using chromosome count cutoffs arbitrarily defined for different assays, decision tree classifiers were used to estimate optimum cutoffs and to evaluate the assays. As a result, we found a decreasing sensitivity for Ag 85B (66.1%), 16S rRNA (62.9%), and sodA (59.7%) optimized assay classifiers, but with similar maximum specificity for leprosy diagnosis. Conversely, the RLEP assay showed to be the most sensitive (87.1%). Moreover, RLEP assay was positive for 3 samples of patients originally not diagnosed as having leprosy, but these patients developed leprosy 5–10 years after the collection of the biopsy. In addition, 4 other samples of patients clinically classified as non-leprosy presented detectable chromosome counts in their samples by the RLEP assay suggesting that those patients either had leprosy that was misdiagnosed or a subclinical state of leprosy. Overall, these results are encouraging and suggest that RLEP assay could be useful as a sensitive diagnostic test to detect M. leprae infection before major clinical manifestations

Risk Related to Pre-Diabetes Mellitus and Diabetes Mellitus in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Insights From Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure Trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of pre-diabetes mellitus and its consequences in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction are not known. We investigated these in the Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined clinical outcomes in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction according to history of diabetes mellitus and glycemic status (baseline hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]: /= 6.5% [>/= 48 mmol/mol; diabetes mellitus]), in Cox regression models adjusted for known predictors of poor outcome. Patients with a history of diabetes mellitus (n = 2907 [35%]) had a higher risk of the primary composite outcome of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality compared with those without a history of diabetes mellitus: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.25 to 1.52; P 6.5%) and known diabetes mellitus compared with those with HbA1c < 6.0% was 1.39 (1.17-1.64); P < 0.001 and 1.64 (1.43-1.87); P < 0.001, respectively. Patients with pre-diabetes mellitus were also at higher risk (hazard ratio, 1.27 [1.10-1.47]; P < 0.001) compared with those with HbA1c < 6.0%. The benefit of LCZ696 (sacubitril/valsartan) compared with enalapril was consistent across the range of HbA1c in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, dysglycemia is common and pre-diabetes mellitus is associated with a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes (compared with patients with no diabetes mellitus and HbA1c < 6.0%). LCZ696 was beneficial compared with enalapril, irrespective of glycemic status. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255