Sex-Related Differences in Violence Exposure, Neural Reactivity to Threat, and Mental Health

The prefrontal cortex (PFC), hippocampus, and amygdala play an important role in emotional health. However, adverse life events (e.g., violence exposure) affect the function of these brain regions, which may lead to disorders such as depression and anxiety. Depression and anxiety disproportionately affect women compared to men, and this disparity may reflect sex differences in the neural processes that underlie emotion expression and regulation. The present study investigated sex differences in the relationship between violence exposure and the neural processes that underlie emotion regulation. In the present study, 200 participants completed a Pavlovian fear conditioning procedure in which cued and non-cued threats (i.e., unconditioned stimuli) were presented during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Violence exposure was previously assessed at four separate time points when participants were 11-19 years of age. Significant threat type (cued versus non-cued) × sex and sex × violence exposure interactions were observed. Specifically, women and men differed in amygdala and parahippocampal gyrus reactivity to cued versus non-cued threat. Further, dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC) and inferior parietal lobule (IPL) reactivity to threat varied positively with violence exposure among women, but not men. Similarly, threat-elicited skin conductance responses varied positively with violence exposure among women. Finally, women reported greater depression and anxiety symptoms than men. These findings suggest that sex differences in threat-related brain and psychophysiological activity may have implications for mental health

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in schizophrenia resistant to clozapine: a double blind randomised placebo controlled trial targeting negative symptoms

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is an effective treatment for a proportion of people with schizophrenia (SZ) who are resistant to the beneficial effects of other antipsychotic drugs. However, anything from 40-60&nbsp;% of people on clozapine experience residual symptoms even on adequate doses of the medication, and thus could be considered \u27clozapine resistant\u27. Agents that could work alongside clozapine to improve efficacy whilst not increasing the adverse effect burden are both desired and necessary to improve the lives of individuals with clozapine-resistant SZ. N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) is one such possible agent. Previous research from our research group provided promising pilot data suggesting the efficacy of NAC in this patient population. The aim of the study reported here is to expand this work by conducting a large scale clinical trial of NAC in the treatment of clozapine-resistant SZ. METHODS: This study is an investigator initiated, multi-site, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. It aims to include 168 patients with clozapine-resistant SZ, divided into an intervention group (NAC) and a control group (placebo). Participants in the intervention group will receive 2&nbsp;g daily of NAC. The primary outcome measures will be the negative symptom scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Secondary outcome measures will include: changes in quality of life (QoL) as measured by the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile (LQoLP) and cognitive functioning as measured by the total score on the MATRICS. Additionally we will examine peripheral and cortical glutathione (GSH) concentrations as process outcomes. DISCUSSION: This large scale clinical trial will investigate the efficacy of NAC as an adjunctive medication to clozapine. This trial, if successful, will establish a cheap, safe and easy-to-use agent (NAC) as a \u27go to\u27 adjunct in patients that are only partly responsive to clozapine.<br /

Biomarker-guided antibiotic stewardship in suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAPrapid2) : a randomised controlled trial and process evaluation

Background Ventilator-associated pneumonia is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection, yet accurate diagnosis remains difficult, leading to overuse of antibiotics. Low concentrations of IL-1β and IL-8 in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid have been validated as effective markers for exclusion of ventilator-associated pneumonia. The VAPrapid2 trial aimed to determine whether measurement of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid IL-1β and IL-8 could effectively and safely improve antibiotic stewardship in patients with clinically suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Methods VAPrapid2 was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in patients admitted to 24 ICUs from 17 National Health Service hospital trusts across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were screened for eligibility and included if they were 18 years or older, intubated and mechanically ventilated for at least 48 h, and had suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to biomarker-guided recommendation on antibiotics (intervention group) or routine use of antibiotics (control group) using a web-based randomisation service hosted by Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit. Patients were randomised using randomly permuted blocks of size four and six and stratified by site, with allocation concealment. Clinicians were masked to patient assignment for an initial period until biomarker results were reported. Bronchoalveolar lavage was done in all patients, with concentrations of IL-1β and IL-8 rapidly determined in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from patients randomised to the biomarker-based antibiotic recommendation group. If concentrations were below a previously validated cutoff, clinicians were advised that ventilator-associated pneumonia was unlikely and to consider discontinuing antibiotics. Patients in the routine use of antibiotics group received antibiotics according to usual practice at sites. Microbiology was done on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from all patients and ventilator-associated pneumonia was confirmed by at least 104 colony forming units per mL of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. The primary outcome was the distribution of antibiotic-free days in the 7 days following bronchoalveolar lavage. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis, with an additional per-protocol analysis that excluded patients randomly assigned to the intervention group who defaulted to routine use of antibiotics because of failure to return an adequate biomarker result. An embedded process evaluation assessed factors influencing trial adoption, recruitment, and decision making. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN65937227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01972425. Findings Between Nov 6, 2013, and Sept 13, 2016, 360 patients were screened for inclusion in the study. 146 patients were ineligible, leaving 214 who were recruited to the study. Four patients were excluded before randomisation, meaning that 210 patients were randomly assigned to biomarker-guided recommendation on antibiotics (n=104) or routine use of antibiotics (n=106). One patient in the biomarker-guided recommendation group was withdrawn by the clinical team before bronchoscopy and so was excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. We found no significant difference in the primary outcome of the distribution of antibiotic-free days in the 7 days following bronchoalveolar lavage in the intention-to-treat analysis (p=0·58). Bronchoalveolar lavage was associated with a small and transient increase in oxygen requirements. Established prescribing practices, reluctance for bronchoalveolar lavage, and dependence on a chain of trial-related procedures emerged as factors that impaired trial processes

Ten-year mortality, disease progression, and treatment-related side effects in men with localised prostate cancer from the ProtecT randomised controlled trial according to treatment received

Background The ProtecT trial reported intention-to-treat analysis of men with localised prostate cancer randomly allocated to active monitoring (AM), radical prostatectomy, and external beam radiotherapy. Objective To report outcomes according to treatment received in men in randomised and treatment choice cohorts. Design, setting, and participants This study focuses on secondary care. Men with clinically localised prostate cancer at one of nine UK centres were invited to participate in the treatment trial comparing AM, radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy. Intervention Two cohorts included 1643 men who agreed to be randomised and 997 who declined randomisation and chose treatment. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Analysis was carried out to assess mortality, metastasis and progression and health-related quality of life impacts on urinary, bowel, and sexual function using patient-reported outcome measures. Analysis was based on comparisons between groups defined by treatment received for both randomised and treatment choice cohorts in turn, with pooled estimates of intervention effect obtained using meta-analysis. Differences were estimated with adjustment for known prognostic factors using propensity scores. Results and limitations According to treatment received, more men receiving AM died of PCa (AM 1.85%, surgery 0.67%, radiotherapy 0.73%), whilst this difference remained consistent with chance in the randomised cohort (p = 0.08); stronger evidence was found in the exploratory analyses (randomised plus choice cohort) when AM was compared with the combined radical treatment group (p = 0.003). There was also strong evidence that metastasis (AM 5.6%, surgery 2.4%, radiotherapy 2.7%) and disease progression (AM 20.35%, surgery 5.87%, radiotherapy 6.62%) were more common in the AM group. Compared with AM, there were higher risks of sexual dysfunction (95% at 6 mo) and urinary incontinence (55% at 6 mo) after surgery, and of sexual dysfunction (88% at 6 mo) and bowel dysfunction (5% at 6 mo) after radiotherapy. The key limitations are the potential for bias when comparing groups defined by treatment received and changes in the protocol for AM during the lengthy follow-up required in trials of screen-detected PCa. Conclusions Analyses according to treatment received showed increased rates of disease-related events and lower rates of patient-reported harms in men managed by AM compared with men managed by radical treatment, and stronger evidence of greater PCa mortality in the AM group. Patient summary More than 95 out of every 100 men with low or intermediate risk localised prostate cancer do not die of prostate cancer within 10 yr, irrespective of whether treatment is by means of monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy. Side effects on sexual and bladder function are better after active monitoring, but the risks of spreading of prostate cancer are more common

Citi Capital Markets Approval Committees form of Minutes Follow-Up reflecting CMAC approval of subprime back ABS CDOs

Some Citi Committee Members noted as present were represented by others in their absenc

Procalcitonin evaluation of antibiotic use in COVID-19 hospitalised patients (PEACH): protocol for a retrospective observational study

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel virus responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although COVID-19 is a viral illness, many patients admitted to hospital are prescribed antibiotics, based on concerns that COVID-19 patients may experience secondary bacterial infections, and the assumption that they may respond well to antibiotic therapy. This has led to an increase in antibiotic use for some hospitalised patients at a time when accumulating antibiotic resistance is a major global threat to health. Procalcitonin (PCT) is an inflammatory marker measured in blood samples and widely recommended to help diagnose bacterial infections and guide antibiotic treatment. The PEACH study will compare patient outcomes from English and Welsh hospitals that used PCT testing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic with those from hospitals not using PCT. It will help to determine whether, and how, PCT testing should be used in the NHS in future waves of COVID-19 to protect patients from antibiotic overuse. PEACH is a retrospective observational cohort study using patient-level clinical data from acute hospital Trusts and Health Boards in England and Wales. The primary objective is to measure the difference in antibiotic use between COVID-19 patients who did or did not have PCT testing at the time of diagnosis. Secondary objectives include measuring differences in length of stay, mortality, intensive care unit admission, and resistant bacterial infections between these groups

Blood Parasites in Owls with Conservation Implications for the Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis)

The three subspecies of Spotted Owl (Northern, Strix occidentalis caurina; California, S. o. occidentalis; and Mexican, S. o. lucida) are all threatened by habitat loss and range expansion of the Barred Owl (S. varia). An unaddressed threat is whether Barred Owls could be a source of novel strains of disease such as avian malaria (Plasmodium spp.) or other blood parasites potentially harmful for Spotted Owls. Although Barred Owls commonly harbor Plasmodium infections, these parasites have not been documented in the Spotted Owl. We screened 111 Spotted Owls, 44 Barred Owls, and 387 owls of nine other species for haemosporidian parasites (Leucocytozoon, Plasmodium, and Haemoproteus spp.). California Spotted Owls had the greatest number of simultaneous multi-species infections (44%). Additionally, sequencing results revealed that the Northern and California Spotted Owl subspecies together had the highest number of Leucocytozoon parasite lineages (n = 17) and unique lineages (n = 12). This high level of sequence diversity is significant because only one Leucocytozoon species (L. danilewskyi) has been accepted as valid among all owls, suggesting that L. danilewskyi is a cryptic species. Furthermore, a Plasmodium parasite was documented in a Northern Spotted Owl for the first time. West Coast Barred Owls had a lower prevalence of infection (15%) when compared to sympatric Spotted Owls (S. o. caurina 52%, S. o. occidentalis 79%) and Barred Owls from the historic range (61%). Consequently, Barred Owls on the West Coast may have a competitive advantage over the potentially immune compromised Spotted Owls

Implementation of corticosteroids in treating COVID-19 in the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK:prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone was the first intervention proven to reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19 being treated in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 in the UK after the RECOVERY trial publication on June 16, 2020, and to identify discrepancies in care. METHODS: We did an audit of clinical implementation of corticosteroids in a prospective, observational, cohort study in 237 UK acute care hospitals between March 16, 2020, and April 14, 2021, restricted to patients aged 18 years or older with proven or high likelihood of COVID-19, who received supplementary oxygen. The primary outcome was administration of dexamethasone, prednisolone, hydrocortisone, or methylprednisolone. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN66726260. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2020, and April 14, 2021, 47 795 (75·2%) of 63 525 of patients on supplementary oxygen received corticosteroids, higher among patients requiring critical care than in those who received ward care (11 185 [86·6%] of 12 909 vs 36 415 [72·4%] of 50 278). Patients 50 years or older were significantly less likely to receive corticosteroids than those younger than 50 years (adjusted odds ratio 0·79 [95% CI 0·70–0·89], p=0·0001, for 70–79 years; 0·52 [0·46–0·58], p80 years), independent of patient demographics and illness severity. 84 (54·2%) of 155 pregnant women received corticosteroids. Rates of corticosteroid administration increased from 27·5% in the week before June 16, 2020, to 75–80% in January, 2021. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of corticosteroids into clinical practice in the UK for patients with COVID-19 has been successful, but not universal. Patients older than 70 years, independent of illness severity, chronic neurological disease, and dementia, were less likely to receive corticosteroids than those who were younger, as were pregnant women. This could reflect appropriate clinical decision making, but the possibility of inequitable access to life-saving care should be considered. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research and UK Medical Research Council

Procalcitonin Is Not a Reliable Biomarker of Bacterial Coinfection in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Undergoing Microbiological Investigation at the Time of Hospital Admission

Abstract Admission procalcitonin measurements and microbiology results were available for 1040 hospitalized adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (from 48 902 included in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium World Health Organization Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK study). Although procalcitonin was higher in bacterial coinfection, this was neither clinically significant (median [IQR], 0.33 [0.11–1.70] ng/mL vs 0.24 [0.10–0.90] ng/mL) nor diagnostically useful (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.56 [95% confidence interval, .51–.60]).</jats:p