Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Propuesta de un plan de negocio para una empresa de producción y comercialización de gelatinas

Antes el estado de crisis permanente en que viven los campesinos, se han visto obligados a adoptar múltiples estrategias basadas en un proceso racional de toma de decisiones. Con la finalidad de asegurar la supervivencia y reproducción social y de los miembros de la familia, dado como resultado, en algunos, casos el fracaso de los mismos. Lo anterior, podría disminuirse si realizan un plan de negocios. Por lo que, el objetivo de esta investigación fue desarrollar un plan de negocios que incluye estrategias de mercadotecnia, organización, operaciones y financieras, para un negocio de producción y venta de gelatinas, ubicado en una localidad rural. Para ello, se realizó un estudio de alcance exploratorio-descriptivo, a través del estudio de caso. Obteniéndose como resultado un documento que plasma las estrategias y actividades a realizar, por parte del empresario, con la intención de que sean la base de éxito y crecimiento del negocio

Successful Optimization of Adalimumab Therapy in Refractory Uveitis Due to Behçet's Disease.

To assess efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab (ADA) therapy optimization in a large series of patients with uveitis due to Behçet disease (BD) who achieved remission after the use of this biologic agent. Open-label multicenter study of ADA-treated patients with BD uveitis refractory to conventional immunosuppressants. Sixty-five of 74 patients with uveitis due to BD, who achieved remission after a median ADA duration of 6 (range, 3-12) months. ADA was optimized in 23 (35.4%) of them. This biologic agent was maintained at a dose of 40 mg/subcutaneously/2 weeks in the remaining 42 patients. After remission, based on a shared decision between the patient and the treating physician, ADA was optimized. When agreement between patient and physician was reached, optimization was performed by prolonging the ADA dosing interval progressively. Comparison between optimized and nonoptimized patients was performed. Efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness in optimized and nonoptimized groups. To determine efficacy, intraocular inflammation (anterior chamber cells, vitritis, and retinal vasculitis), macular thickness, visual acuity, and the sparing effect of glucocorticoids were assessed. No demographic or ocular differences were found at the time of ADA onset between the optimized and the nonoptimized groups. Most ocular outcomes were similar after a mean ± standard deviation follow-up of 34.7±13.3 and 26±21.3 months in the optimized and nonoptimized groups, respectively. However, relevant adverse effects were only seen in the nonoptimized group (lymphoma, pneumonia, severe local reaction at the injection site, and bacteremia by Escherichia coli, 1 each). Moreover, the mean ADA treatment costs were lower in the optimized group than in the nonoptimized group (6101.25 euros/patient/year vs. 12 339.48; P ADA optimization in BD uveitis refractory to conventional therapy is effective, safe, and cost-effective

Comparative Study of Infliximab Versus Adalimumab in Refractory Uveitis due to Behçet's Disease: National Multicenter Study of 177 Cases.

To compare the efficacy of infliximab (IFX) versus adalimumab (ADA) as a first-line biologic drug over 1 year of treatment in a large series of patients with refractory uveitis due to Behçet's disease (BD). We conducted an open-label multicenter study of IFX versus ADA for BD-related uveitis refractory to conventional nonbiologic treatment. IFX or ADA was chosen as the first-line biologic agent based on physician and patient agreement. Patients received 3-5 mg/kg intravenous IFX at 0, 2, and 6 weeks and every 4-8 weeks thereafter, or 40 mg subcutaneous ADA every other week without a loading dose. Ocular parameters were compared between the 2 groups. The study included 177 patients (316 affected eyes), of whom 103 received IFX and 74 received ADA. There were no significant baseline differences between treatment groups in main demographic features, previous therapy, or ocular sign severity. After 1 year of therapy, we observed an improvement in all ocular parameters in both groups. However, patients receiving ADA had significantly better outcomes in some parameters, including improvement in anterior chamber inflammation (92.31% versus 78.18% for IFX; P = 0.06), improvement in vitritis (93.33% versus 78.95% for IFX; P = 0.04), and best-corrected visual acuity (mean ± SD 0.81 ± 0.26 versus 0.67 ± 0.34 for IFX; P = 0.001). A nonsignificant difference was seen for macular thickness (mean ± SD 250.62 ± 36.85 for ADA versus 264.89 ± 59.74 for IFX; P = 0.15), and improvement in retinal vasculitis was similar between the 2 groups (95% for ADA versus 97% for IFX; P = 0.28). The drug retention rate was higher in the ADA group (95.24% versus 84.95% for IFX; P = 0.042). Although both IFX and ADA are efficacious in refractory BD-related uveitis, ADA appears to be associated with better outcomes than IFX after 1 year of follow-up