Skeletal growth in class II malocclusion from childhood to adolescence: does the profile straighten?

BACKGROUND There is relatively little appreciation of the changes in maxillary-mandibular relationships occurring during adolescence among subjects with normal and increased overjet. The aim of this study was to assess differences in changes in maxillo-mandibular relationships during the adolescent growth period based on the presence of a normal ( 4 mm) overjet in childhood. Our hypothesis was that there is no difference in the change of the A point, nasion, B point (ANB) angle during growth between these two overjet groups. Lateral cephalograms were obtained from 65 subjects taken from the American Association of Orthodontists Foundation (AAOF) Craniofacial Growth Legacy Collections Project. Cephalograms were obtained at ages 7-10 (T0) and 14-17 (T1) with allocation into two groups based on baseline overjet (> 4 mm: group 1, 2-4 mm: group 2). Random effects linear regression was used to account for multiple within -patient measurements with dependent variables including antero-posterior skeletal pattern (based on sella, nasion, A point (SNA); sella, nasion, B point (SNB); and ANB angles). RESULTS We included a similar number of males (n = 34; 52.3%) and females (n = 31; 47.7%). The mean ANB was higher at baseline in group 1 (5.42, SD 2.16°) than in group 2 (3.08, SD 1.91°). The hypothesis was rejected as the ANB angle reduced by 1.92° more in the larger overjet group with the association being statistically significant after accounting for age and gender (P  4 mm overjet group compared to the 2-4 mm group (0.857°, P = 0.271; 95% CI - 0.669 to 2.383). The SNB angle increased by 1.15° more in the higher overjet group but there was only weak evidence of an association (P = 0.086; 95% CI - 2.464 to 0.164). CONCLUSIONS A slight straightening of the facial profile was observed in both groups with a statistically significant greater reduction in ANB arising in the group with larger baseline overjet. This translated into a marginal reduction in the overjet in this group

CEO Education and the Ability to Raise Capital

Research Question/Issue: Using a unique hand‐collected dataset, this study examines the role of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) educational attainments in relation to newly public firms. Research Findings/Insights: We find that Initial Public Offering (IPO) firms led by CEOs with superior educational credentials — in terms of level and quality — are associated with lower levels of IPO underpricing. This association is mainly driven by CEOs that hold advanced degrees. Notably, a difference‐in‐difference approach based on two quasi‐natural experiments indicates that the impact of CEO education on IPO underpricing is more pronounced within environments characterized by lower information transparency. The baseline results also hold in the longer term, thereby confirming the value of signaling prestigious academic awards at the time of the IPO. Theoretical/Academic Implications: Using human capital, institutional and upper echelon theories, we hypothesize and demonstrate that CEO educational attainments do not unambiguously affect investors’ perceptions of a firm's future prospects. Instead, their influence depends on the quality of CEO education as well as on the degree of uncertainty regarding the firm's future performance, and the level of information asymmetry between issuers and prospective investors. To our knowledge, this is the first study that provides a comprehensive treatment of the role of CEO education in the IPO context. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Our evidence on the importance of CEO education, and especially that CEOs with varying levels and quality of educational training might differentially affect newly listed firms, is useful to providers of financial capital and boards of directors interested in assessing the viability of new ventures. The implication of our study for IPO investors is that it is worth paying more to take an equity position in firms run by better‐educated CEOs

Social interaction, noise and antibiotic-mediated switches in the intestinal microbiota

The intestinal microbiota plays important roles in digestion and resistance against entero-pathogens. As with other ecosystems, its species composition is resilient against small disturbances but strong perturbations such as antibiotics can affect the consortium dramatically. Antibiotic cessation does not necessarily restore pre-treatment conditions and disturbed microbiota are often susceptible to pathogen invasion. Here we propose a mathematical model to explain how antibiotic-mediated switches in the microbiota composition can result from simple social interactions between antibiotic-tolerant and antibiotic-sensitive bacterial groups. We build a two-species (e.g. two functional-groups) model and identify regions of domination by antibiotic-sensitive or antibiotic-tolerant bacteria, as well as a region of multistability where domination by either group is possible. Using a new framework that we derived from statistical physics, we calculate the duration of each microbiota composition state. This is shown to depend on the balance between random fluctuations in the bacterial densities and the strength of microbial interactions. The singular value decomposition of recent metagenomic data confirms our assumption of grouping microbes as antibiotic-tolerant or antibiotic-sensitive in response to a single antibiotic. Our methodology can be extended to multiple bacterial groups and thus it provides an ecological formalism to help interpret the present surge in microbiome data.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figures accepted for publication in Plos Comp Bio. Supplementary video and information availabl

Effect and Safety of Meropenem\u2013Vaborbactam versus Best-Available Therapy in Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Infections: The TANGO II Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction: Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections are limited and CRE infections remain associated with high clinical failure and mortality rates, particularly in vulnerable patient populations. A Phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomized controlled trial (TANGO II) was conducted from 2014 to 2017 to evaluate the efficacy/safety of meropenem\u2013vaborbactam monotherapy versus best available therapy (BAT) for CRE. Methods: A total of 77 patients with confirmed/suspected CRE infection (bacteremia, hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, complicated urinary tract infection/acute pyelonephritis) were randomized, and 47 with confirmed CRE infection formed the primary analysis population (microbiologic-CRE-modified intent-to-treat, mCRE-MITT). Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to meropenem\u2013vaborbactam (2 g/2 g over 3 h, q8h for 7\u201314 days) or BAT (mono/combination therapy with polymyxins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides, tigecycline; or ceftazidime-avibactam alone). Efficacy endpoints included clinical cure, Day-28 all-cause mortality, microbiologic cure, and overall success (clinical cure + microbiologic eradication). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory findings. Results: Within the mCRE-MITT population, cure rates were 65.6% (21/32) and 33.3% (5/15) [95% confidence interval (CI) of difference, 3.3% to 61.3%; P = 0.03)] at End of Treatment and 59.4% (19/32) and 26.7% (4/15) (95% CI of difference, 4.6% to 60.8%; P = 0.02) at Test of Cure;.Day-28 all-cause mortality was 15.6% (5/32) and 33.3% (5/15) (95% CI of difference, 12 44.7% to 9.3%) for meropenem\u2013vaborbactam versus BAT, respectively. Treatment-related AEs and renal-related AEs were 24.0% (12/50) and 4.0% (2/50) for meropenem\u2013vaborbactam versus 44.0% (11/25) and 24.0% (6/25) for BAT. Exploratory risk\u2013benefit analyses of composite clinical failure or nephrotoxicity favored meropenem\u2013vaborbactam versus BAT (31.3% [10/32] versus 80.0% [12/15]; 95% CI of difference, 12 74.6% to 12 22.9%; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Monotherapy with meropenem\u2013vaborbactam for CRE infection was associated with increased clinical cure, decreased mortality, and reduced nephrotoxicity compared with BAT. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02168946. Funding: The Medicines Company