11 research outputs found

    Drinking motives among Spanish and Hungarian young adults: a cross-national study

    Get PDF
    AIMS: To investigate differences and similarities in college students' drinking motives in Spain and in Hungary. METHODS: A total of 550 Spanish (mean age 22.7, SD = 3.2) and 997 Hungarian (mean age 22.4, SD = 2.7) college students completed the Drinking Motive Questionnaire Revised Short Form (DMQ-R SF) and answered other alcohol-related questions. Data were analyzed by confirmatory factor analysis, t-test and structural equation modeling. RESULTS: The DMQ-R SF demonstrated good psychometric properties in both countries. The rank order of the motives (social > enhancement > coping > conformity) was identical in the two countries. However, Hungarian students scored higher on enhancement, social and coping motives than Spanish students. In both the Hungarian and the Spanish population, enhancement motives were associated with drinking frequency and drunkenness, while coping motives were associated with alcohol-related problems. Among Spanish students, a significant relationship was found between alcohol-related problems and enhancement motives as well. CONCLUSION: Despite the substantial differences in the drinking culture of both countries, drinking motives showed overwhelming similarities (e.g. rank order of motives and the particular relationships between motives and alcohol outcomes). Only few differences (e.g. Hungarian college students indicated a higher level of motives) were found in cross-national comparison. Our results imply that programs targeting risky drinking motives are likely to be successfully adapted to different drinking cultures in Europe

    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.

    Get PDF
    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

    Get PDF
    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

    Role of Autophagy in Parkinson’s Disease

    No full text

    Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

    No full text

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    No full text
    [[sponsorship]]生物化學研究所[[note]]已出版;[SCI];有審查制度;具代表性[[note]]http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Drexel&SrcApp=hagerty_opac&KeyRecord=1554-8627&DestApp=JCR&RQ=IF_CAT_BOXPLO

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    No full text

    Dietary inflammatory index and all-cause mortality in large cohorts: The SUN and PREDIMED studies

    No full text
    [Background]: Inflammation is known to be related to the leading causes of death including cardiovascular disease, several types of cancer, obesity, type 2 diabetes, depression-suicide and other chronic diseases. In the context of whole dietary patterns, the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII®) was developed to appraise the inflammatory potential of the diet. [Objective]: We prospectively assessed the association between DII scores and all-cause mortality in two large Spanish cohorts and valuated the consistency of findings across these two cohorts and results published based on other cohorts.[Design]: We assessed 18,566 participants in the “Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra” (SUN) cohort followed-up during 188,891 person-years and 6790 participants in the “PREvencion con DIeta MEDiterránea” (PREDIMED) randomized trial representing 30,233 person-years of follow-up. DII scores were calculated in both cohorts from validated FFQs. Higher DII scores corresponded to more proinflammatory diets. A total of 230 and 302 deaths occurred in SUN and PREDIMED, respectively. In a random-effect meta-analysis we included 12 prospective studies (SUN, PREDIMED and 10 additional studies) that assessed the association between DII scores and all-cause mortality.[Results]: After adjusting for a wide array of potential confounders, the comparison between extreme quartiles of the DII showed a positive and significant association with all-cause mortality in both the SUN (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.85; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.98; P-trend = 0.004) and the PREDIMED cohort (HR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.00, 2.02; P-trend = 0.009). In the meta-analysis of 12 cohorts, the DII was significantly associated with an increase of 23% in all-cause mortality (95% CI: 16%–32%, for the highest vs lowest category of DII).[Conclusion]: Our results provide strong and consistent support for the hypothesis that a pro-inflammatory diet is associated with increased all-cause mortality. The SUN cohort and PREDIMED trial were registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02669602 and at isrctn.com as ISRCTN35739639, respectively.Supported by the official funding agency for biomedical research of the Spanish Government, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), through grants provided to research networks specifically developed for the trial (RTIC G03/140, to R.E.; RTIC RD 06/0045, to Miguel A. Martínez-González) and through Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y Nutrición (CIBERobn), and by grants from Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares (CNIC 06/2007), Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria–Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (Proyecto de Investigación (PI) 04-2239, PI 05/2584, CP06/00100, PI07/0240, PI07/1138, PI07/0954, PI 07/0473, PI10/01407, PI10/02658, PI11/01647, P11/02505, PI13/00462, PI13/00615, PI13/01090, PI14/01668, PI14/01798, PI14/01764), Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (Recursos y teconologia agroalimentarias(AGL)-2009-13906-C02 and AGL2010-22319-C03 and AGL2013-49083-C3-1- R), Fundación Mapfre 2010, the Consejería de Salud de la Junta de Andalucía (PI0105/2007), the Public Health Division of the Department of Health of the Autonomous Government of Catalonia, Generalitat Valenciana (Generalitat Valenciana Ayuda Complementaria (GVACOMP) 06109, GVACOMP2010-181, GVACOMP2011-151), Conselleria de Sanitat y, PI14/01764 AP; Atención Primaria (CS) 2010-AP-111, and CS2011-AP-042), and Regional Government of Navarra (P27/2011).). Drs. Shivappa and Hébert were supported by grant number R44DK103377 from the United States National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
    corecore