Partial delivery: Opportunity or threat for wine cooperatives

Numerous wine cooperatives exclude partial delivery by a strict and unexceptional full delivery obligation. However, in practice, some well-known representatives of the German wine cooperative system, such as Moselland eG, successfully follow the partial delivery procedure. In addition, cooperative members use various measures in practice to avoid the full delivery obligation, e.g. through the legal division or splitting of the member companies. Nevertheless, the procedure is currently barely investigated and researched, and since neither the DRV nor the auditing cooperative associations carry out surveys on the partial delivery, it is not possible to determine the exact significance of this for the German winegrowers’ cooperative system (Jung, 2016). Due to the current situation with regard to partial delivery in the German wine cooperative system, the aim of this paper is to present the concept of partial delivery and to discuss challenges for the cooperative system

In Situ Characterisation of Permanent Magnetic Quadrupoles for focussing proton beams

High intensity laser driven proton beams are at present receiving much attention. The reasons for this are many but high on the list is the potential to produce compact accelerators. However two of the limitations of this technology is that unlike conventional nuclear RF accelerators lasers produce diverging beams with an exponential energy distribution. A number of different approaches have been attempted to monochromise these beams but it has become obvious that magnetic spectrometer technology developed over many years by nuclear physicists to transport and focus proton beams could play an important role for this purpose. This paper deals with the design and characterisation of a magnetic quadrupole system which will attempt to focus and transport laser-accelerated proton beams.Comment: 20 pages, 42 figure

Corrigendum to "European contribution to the study of ROS:A summary of the findings and prospects for the future from the COST action BM1203 (EU-ROS)" [Redox Biol. 13 (2017) 94-162]

The European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) provides an ideal framework to establish multi-disciplinary research networks. COST Action BM1203 (EU-ROS) represents a consortium of researchers from different disciplines who are dedicated to providing new insights and tools for better understanding redox biology and medicine and, in the long run, to finding new therapeutic strategies to target dysregulated redox processes in various diseases. This report highlights the major achievements of EU-ROS as well as research updates and new perspectives arising from its members. The EU-ROS consortium comprised more than 140 active members who worked together for four years on the topics briefly described below. The formation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS) is an established hallmark of our aerobic environment and metabolism but RONS also act as messengers via redox regulation of essential cellular processes. The fact that many diseases have been found to be associated with oxidative stress established the theory of oxidative stress as a trigger of diseases that can be corrected by antioxidant therapy. However, while experimental studies support this thesis, clinical studies still generate controversial results, due to complex pathophysiology of oxidative stress in humans. For future improvement of antioxidant therapy and better understanding of redox-associated disease progression detailed knowledge on the sources and targets of RONS formation and discrimination of their detrimental or beneficial roles is required. In order to advance this important area of biology and medicine, highly synergistic approaches combining a variety of diverse and contrasting disciplines are needed

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences

Impact of primary kidney disease on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease: secondary analyses of the EMPA-KIDNEY trial

Background: The EMPA KIDNEY trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic kidney disease mainly through slowing progression. We aimed to assess how effects of empagliflozin might differ by primary kidney disease across its broad population. Methods: EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA). Patients were eligible if their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher at screening. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily or matching placebo. Effects on kidney disease progression (defined as a sustained ≥40% eGFR decline from randomisation, end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR below 10 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or death from kidney failure) were assessed using prespecified Cox models, and eGFR slope analyses used shared parameter models. Subgroup comparisons were performed by including relevant interaction terms in models. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. Findings: Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and followed up for a median of 2·0 years (IQR 1·5–2·4). Prespecified subgroupings by primary kidney disease included 2057 (31·1%) participants with diabetic kidney disease, 1669 (25·3%) with glomerular disease, 1445 (21·9%) with hypertensive or renovascular disease, and 1438 (21·8%) with other or unknown causes. Kidney disease progression occurred in 384 (11·6%) of 3304 patients in the empagliflozin group and 504 (15·2%) of 3305 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·71 [95% CI 0·62–0·81]), with no evidence that the relative effect size varied significantly by primary kidney disease (pheterogeneity=0·62). The between-group difference in chronic eGFR slopes (ie, from 2 months to final follow-up) was 1·37 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (95% CI 1·16–1·59), representing a 50% (42–58) reduction in the rate of chronic eGFR decline. This relative effect of empagliflozin on chronic eGFR slope was similar in analyses by different primary kidney diseases, including in explorations by type of glomerular disease and diabetes (p values for heterogeneity all &gt;0·1). Interpretation: In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk of progression, including a wide range of non-diabetic causes of chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin reduced risk of kidney disease progression. Relative effect sizes were broadly similar irrespective of the cause of primary kidney disease, suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors should be part of a standard of care to minimise risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and UK Medical Research Council