Introduction to "Working Across Species"

Comparison between different animal species is omnipresent in the history of science and medicine but rarely subject to focussed historical analysis. The articles in the ‘‘Working Across Species’’ topical collection address this deficit by looking directly at the practical and epistemic work of cross-species comparison. Drawn from papers presented at a Wellcome-Trust-funded workshop in 2016, these papers investigate various ways that comparison has been made persuasive and successful, in multiple locations, by diverse disciplines, over the course of two centuries. They explore the many different animal features that have been considered to be (or else made) comparable, and the ways that animals have shaped science and medicine through the use of comparison. Authors demonstrate that comparison between species often transcended the range of practices typically employed with experimental animal models, where standardised practises and apparatus were applied to standardised bodies to produce generalizable, objective data; instead, comparison across species has often engaged diverse groups of nonstandard species, made use of subjective inferences about phenomena that cannot be directly observed, and inspired analogies that linked physiological and behavioural characteristics with the apparent affective state of non-human animals. Moreover, such comparative practices have also provided unusually fruitful opportunities for collaborative connections between different research traditions and disciplines

Introduction: microbes, networks, knowledge—disease ecology and emerging infectious diseases in time of COVID-19

This is an introduction to the topical collection Microbes, Networks, Knowledge: Disease Ecology in the twentieth Century, based on a workshop held at Queen Mary, University London on July 6–7 2016. More than twenty years ago, historian of science and medicine Andrew Mendelsohn asked, “Where did the modern, ecological understanding of epidemic disease come from?” Moving beyond Mendelsohn’s answer, this collection of new essays considers the global history of disease ecology in the past century and shows how epidemics and pandemics have made “microbes complex”

The incidence and significance of anti-natalizumab antibodies - Results from AFFIRM and SENTINEL

Objective: To determine the incidence and clinical effects of antibodies that develop during treatment with natalizumab

Health-related quality of life in multiple sclerosis: Effects of natalizumab

Objective: To report the relationship between disease activity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in relapsing multiple sclerosis, and the impact of natalizumab. Methods: HRQoL data were available from 2,113 multiple sclerosis patients in natalizumab clinical studies. In the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study, patients received natalizumab 300mg (n = 627) or placebo (n = 315); in the Safety and Efficacy of Natalizumab in Combination with Interferon Beta-1a in Patients with Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (SENTINEL) study, patients received interferon beta-la (IFN-\u3b2-1a) plus natalizumab 300mg (n = 589), or IFN-\u3b2-1a plus placebo (n = 582). The Short Form-36 (SF-36) and a subject global assessment visual analog scale were administered at baseline and weeks 24, 52, and 104. Prespecified analyses included changes from baseline to week 104 in SF-36 and visual analog scale scores. Odds ratios for clinically meaningful improvement or worsening on the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary were calculated. Results: Mean baseline SF-36 scores were significantly less than the general US population and correlated with Expanded Disability Status Scale scores, sustained disability progression, relapse number, and increased volume of brain magnetic resonance imaging lesions. Natalizumab significantly improved SF-36 PCS and Mental Component Summary scores at week 104 in AFFIRM. PCS changes were significantly improved by week 24 and at all subsequent time points. Natalizumab-treated patients in both studies were more likely to experience clinically important improvement and less likely to experience clinically important deterioration on the SF-36 PCS. The visual analog scale also showed significantly improved HRQoL with natalizumab. Interpretation: HRQoL was impaired in relapsing multiple sclerosis patients, correlated with severity of disease as measured by neurological ratings or magnetic resonance imaging, and improved significantly with natalizumab. \ua9 2007 American Neurological Association. Published by Wiley-Liss, Inc