Assessing the Reliability of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Studies That Use Post-Vaccination Sera

Assessing COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants is crucial for determining future vaccination strategies and other public health strategies. When clinical effectiveness data are unavailable, a common method of assessing vaccine performance is to utilize neutralization assays using post-vaccination sera. Neutralization studies are typically performed across a wide array of settings, populations and vaccination strategies, and using different methodologies. For any comparison and meta-analysis to be meaningful, the design and methodology of the studies used must at minimum address aspects that confer a certain degree of reliability and comparability. We identified and characterized three important categories in which studies differ (cohort details, assay details and data reporting details) and that can affect the overall reliability and/or usefulness of neutralization assay results. We define reliability as a measure of methodological accuracy, proper study setting concerning subjects, samples and viruses, and reporting quality. Each category comprises a set of several relevant key parameters. To each parameter, we assigned a possible impact (ranging from low to high) on overall study reliability depending on its potential to influence the results. We then developed a reliability assessment tool that assesses the aggregate reliability of a study across all parameters. The reliability assessment tool provides explicit selection criteria for inclusion of comparable studies in meta-analyses of neutralization activity of SARS-CoV-2 variants in post-vaccination sera and can also both guide the design of future neutralization studies and serve as a checklist for including important details on key parameters in publications

Lack of Effect of Sleep Apnea on Oxidative Stress in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS) Patients

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate markers of systemic oxidative stress and antioxidant capacity in subjects with and without OSAS in order to investigate the most important factors that determine the oxidant-antioxidant status. METHODS: A total of 66 subjects referred to our Sleep laboratory were examined by full polysomnography. Oxidative stress and antioxidant activity were assessed by measurement of the derivatives of reactive oxygen metabolites (d-ROMs) and the biological antioxidant capacity (BAP) in blood samples taken in the morning after the sleep study. Known risk factors for oxidative stress, such as age, sex, obesity, smoking, hypelipidemia, and hypertension, were investigated as possible confounding factors. RESULTS: 42 patients with OSAS (Apnea-Hypopnea index >15 events/hour) were compared with 24 controls (AHI<5). The levels of d-ROMS were significantly higher (p = 0.005) in the control group but the levels of antioxidant capacity were significantly lower (p = 0.004) in OSAS patients. The most important factors predicting the variance of oxidative stress were obesity, smoking habit, and sex. Parameters of sleep apnea severity were not associated with oxidative stress. Minimal oxygen desaturation and smoking habit were the most important predicting factors of BAP levels. CONCLUSION: Obesity, smoking, and sex are the most important determinants of oxidative stress in OSAS subjects. Sleep apnea might enhance oxidative stress by the reduction of antioxidant capacity of blood due to nocturnal hypoxia

Use of statins and breast cancer: A meta-analysis of seven randomized clinical trials and nine observational studies

Purpose: A growing body of evidence suggests that statins may have chemopreventive potential against breast cancer. Laboratory studies demonstrate that statins induce apoptosis and reduce cell invasiveness in various cell lines, including breast carcinoma cells. However, the clinical relevance of these data remains unclear. The nonconclusive nature of the epidemiologic data prompted us to conduct a detailed meta-analysis of the studies published on the subject in peer-reviewed literature. Patients and Methods: A comprehensive search for articles published up until 2005 was performed; reviews of each study were conducted; and data were abstracted. Before meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% CIs were calculated using the random and the fixed-effects models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results: Seven large randomized trials and nine observational studies (five case-control and four cohort studies) contributed to the analysis. We found no evidence of publication bias or heterogeneity among the studies. Statin use did not significantly affect breast cancer risk (fixed effects model: RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.14; random effects model: RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.18). When the analyses were stratified into subgroups, there was no evidence that study design substantially influenced the estimate of effects. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our results. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis findings do not support a protective effect of statins against breast cancer. However, this conclusion is limited by the relatively short follow-up times of the studies analyzed. Further studies are required to investigate the potential decrease in breast cancer risk among long-term statin users. © 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

Statins and cancer risk: A literature-based meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of 35 randomized controlled trials

Purpose: A growing body of literature suggests that statins may have chemopreventive potential against cancer. Our aim was to examine the strength of this association through a detailed meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: A comprehensive search for trials published up to 2005 was performed, reviews of each study were conducted, and data were abstracted. Before meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% CIs were calculated using the random-and fixed-effects models. Subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted. Results: Thirty-five RCTs of statins for cardiovascular outcomes contributed to the analysis (n = 109,143). The degree of variability between trials was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone. Statin use was not associated with a substantially increased or decreased overall risk of cancer (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.04). Similarly, statin use did not significantly affect respiratory cancer risk (RR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.09). However, the meta-regression analysis indicated that age of study participants modified the association between statin use and cancer risk (P = .003). Conclusion: Our findings do not support a protective effect of statins against cancer. However, this conclusion is limited by the relatively short follow-up periods (4.5 years on average) of the studies analyzed. Thus, it is important to continue monitoring the long-term safety profiles of statins. Until then, physicians need to be vigilant in ensuring that statin use remains restricted to the approved indications. © 2006 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

Metachromatic reaction and antihistaminic drugs

We studied the effect of antithistaminic sub stance on the dye-polysaccharide interaction, using a model in vitro system consisting of heparin-Na and the basic dye o-toluidine blue. The results are recorded on absorption curves in the visible range under standard and modified experimental conditions. We concluded that both histamine and antihistaminic drugs interact in vitro with mucopolysaccharide substances. The results are dis cussed on a pharmacological basis. © 1983 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted