Production Frontier of Small Scale Pearl Millet Farmers: A Comparison of Conservation and Traditional Agricultural Practices in the Northern Namibia

This study fits a stochastic Cobb-Douglas production frontier of the pearl millet smallholder farmers and examined their technical efficiency comparing Conservation and Traditional Agriculture practices. The data was collected using a structured questionnaire administrated to 100 randomly selected smallholder farmers in Omusati, Ohangwena, Oshikoto, Oshana and Kavango regions during the 2014-2015 planting season. The estimated parameter of the model shows that land availability, the level of fertilizer use and tractor power explains variations in the production of pearl millet. The efficiency analysis result shows there is no statistically significant difference in the technical efficiency of farmers who were exposed to conservation agriculture compared to their traditional method of agriculture. The inefficiency model indicates that farm experience, farm size, and farm training have significant positive effect on efficiency. In addition, the study examined farmers willingness to pay for extension services, the predicted probability of getting farmers who are willing to pay is 60%. Some socio-economic factors such as farm size, herd size, and membership of a cooperative were found to influence farmers’ willingness to pay for extension service. The study recommends that Conservation Agriculture should be continued over a long period of time so that the impact can be felt. Capacity building, training, extension services, information on agronomic practices and farmer’s education are factors that policy should address. Keywords: technical efficiency, Conservation Agriculture, pearl millet, stochastic production frontier

Identification of PIKfyve kinase as a target in multiple myeloma

The cellular cytotoxicity of APY0201, a PIKfyve inhibitor, against multiple myeloma was initially identified in an unbiased in vitro chemical library screen. The activity of APY0201 was confirmed in all 25 cell lines tested and in 40% of 100 ex vivo patient-derived primary samples, with increased activity in primary samples harboring trisomies and lacking t(11;14). The broad anti-multiple myeloma activity of PIKfyve inhibitors was further demonstrated in confirmatory screens and showed the superior potency of APY0201 when compared to the PIKfyve inhibitors YM201636 and apilimod, with a mid-point half maximal effective concentration (EC50) at nanomolar concentrations in, respectively, 65%, 40%, and 5% of the tested cell lines. Upregulation of genes in the lysosomal pathway and increased cellular vacuolization were observed in vitro following APY0201 treatment, although these cellular effects did not correlate well with responsiveness. We confirm that PIKfyve inhibition is associated with activation of the transcription factor EB, a master regulator of lysosomal biogenesis and autophagy. Furthermore, we established an assay measuring autophagy as a predictive marker of APY0201 sensitivity. Overall, these findings indicate promising activity of PIKfyve inhibitors secondary to disruption of autophagy in multiple myeloma and suggest a strategy to enrich for likely responders

Perfis de Vulnerabilidade Feminina ao HIV/aids em Belo Horizonte e Recife: comparando brancas e negras

OBJETIVO: Delinear e comparar os perfis das mulheres brancas e negras entre 18 e 59 anos, residentes em Belo Horizonte e Recife, enfocando características sociodemográficas e de conhecimento, além de atitudes em relação ao HIV/aids. MÉTODOS: Os dados são oriundos da pesquisa amostral SRSR - Saúde Reprodutiva, Sexualidade e Raça/Cor, conduzida pelo Cedeplar/UFMG em 2002 e única desta natureza com representatividade municipal. O método utilizado foi o Grade of Membership (GoM), a partir do qual foram gerados quatro perfis extremos para cada município. RESULTADOS: Tanto em Belo Horizonte quanto em Recife, as mulheres com maior probabilidade de serem brancas são também aquelas com maior probabilidade de ter escolaridade mais elevada, possuir plano de saúde, ter tido parceiro estável no ano anterior à pesquisa e ter poder na relação sexual. Quanto às negras, apenas em Belo Horizonte elas têm maior probabilidade de serem de baixa escolaridade, não possuírem plano de saúde, além de se sentirem desempoderadas diante do parceiro sexual. CONCLUSÕES: A comparação dos perfis de brancas e negras em Belo Horizonte e Recife revela diferenças na vulnerabilidade dessas mulheres ao HIV/aids. As diferenças entre os dois grupos são mais evidentes em Belo Horizonte.OBJECTIVE: To delineate and compare profiles of white and "Black" (either Black or mixed) women, 18 to 59 years-old, residents of Belo Horizonte and Recife (Brazil), focusing on their knowledge and attitudes about HIV/AIDS, as well as their socio-demographic characteristics. METHODS: Data come from the survey SRSR (Reproductive Health, Sexuality, and Race/Skin Color), conducted by Cedeplar in 2002 and the only one of its kind with representativeness at the municipality (county) level. Grade of Membership (GoM) was used to generate four profiles of women for each county. RESULTS: In Belo Horizonte and Recife, women who are more likely to be White are also more likely to have better education, health insurance, a stable partner in the year before the survey, and more power in their sexual partnership. Regarding the "Black" women in Belo Horizonte, they are more likely to have low education, no health insurance, and less power with their sexual partners. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison among the profiles of White and "Black" women in Belo Horizonte and Recife points to differences regarding their vulnerability to HIV/AIDS. The differences between the two racial groups are more evident in Belo Horizonte

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials