Xerostomía en pacientes con fibromialgia

Introducción: dentro de los fenómenos clínicos estudiados asociados a la Fibromialgia (FM) se ha descrito el Síndrome Sicca, cuyo término engloba xeroftalmia, xerostomía, xerodermia y xerovagina

Suppression of Age-Related Salivary Gland Autoimmunity by Glycosylation-Dependent galectin-1-driven Immune Inhibitory Circuits

Aging elicits quantitative and qualitative changes in different immune components, leading to disruption of tolerogenic circuits and development of autoimmune disorders. Galectin-1 (Gal1), an endogenous glycan-binding protein, has emerged as a regulator of immune cell homeostasis by shaping the fate of myeloid and lymphoid cells. Here, we demonstrate that aged Gal1-null mutant (Lgals1−/−) mice develop a spontaneous inflammatory process in salivary glands that resembles Sjögren's syndrome. This spontaneous autoimmune phenotype was recapitulated in mice lacking β1,6N-acetylglucosaminyltransferase V (Mgat5), an enzyme responsible for generating β1,6-branched complex N-glycans, which serve as a major ligand for this lectin. Lack of Gal1 resulted in CD11c+ dendritic cells (DCs) with higher immunogenic potential, lower frequency of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs), and increased number of CD8+ T cells with greater effector capacity. Supporting its tolerogenic activity, Gal1 expression decreased with age in autoimmunity-prone nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice. Treatment with recombinant Gal1 restored tolerogenic mechanisms and reduced salivary gland inflammation. Accordingly, labial biopsies from primary Sjögren's syndrome patients showed reduced Gal1 expression concomitant with higher number of infiltrating CD8+ T cells. Thus, endogenous Gal1 serves as a homeostatic rheostat that safeguards immune tolerance and prevents age-dependent development of spontaneous autoimmunity.Fil: Martínez Allo, Verónica Candela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Hauk, Vanesa Cintia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Química Biológica de la Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Química Biológica de la Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales; ArgentinaFil: Sarbia, Nicolás. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Pinto, Nicolás Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Croci Russo, Diego Omar. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Ciencias Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Dalotto Moreno, Tomás. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Morales, Rosa M.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Gatto, Sabrina Gisela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Manselle Cocco, Montana Nicolle. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Stupirski, Juan Carlos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Deladoey, Ángel. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Maronna, Esteban. Sanatorio Mater Dei; ArgentinaFil: Marcaida, Priscila. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Durigan, Virginia. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Secco, Anastasia. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Mamani, Marta. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Santos, Alicia Dos. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Pellet, Antonio Catalán. Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia; ArgentinaFil: Leiros, Claudia Pérez. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Química Biológica de la Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Química Biológica de la Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales; ArgentinaFil: Rabinovich, Gabriel Adrián. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Toscano, Marta Alicia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; Argentin

Glifosato aplicado com diferentes concentrações de uréia ou sulfato de amônio para dessecação de plantas daninhas Glyphosate applied with different concentrations of urea or ammonium sulfate for weed desiccation

Este trabalho foi desenvolvido com o objetivo de avaliar a eficácia do herbicida glifosato, para a dessecação de trapoeraba (Commelina benghalensis) e outras plantas daninhas, quando combinado a diferentes concentrações de sulfato de amônio ou uréia. Foram conduzidos três experimentos com tratamentos semelhantes: dois em campo e um em casa de vegetação. Os tratamentos aplicados em campo foram: glifosato (360 g ha-1 de e.a.), isolado ou acrescido de quatro concentrações de sulfato de amônio (2,5, 5, 10 e 20 g L-1) ou uréia (1,5, 3, 6 e 12 g L-1); glifosato a 720 g ha-1 de e.a., aplicado isoladamente; e testemunha sem aplicação. Em casa de vegetação, para o controle específico da trapoeraba, as doses de glifosato foram elevadas para 720 (isolado e nas combinações) e 1.440 g ha-1 de e.a. A adição de sulfato de amônio à calda do glifosato elevou o controle das plantas daninhas em campo, para as concentrações com até 10 g L-1. O herbicida glifosato não foi eficaz no controle da trapoeraba, em nenhumas das doses usadas. A adição de uréia não promoveu incrementos de controle em condição de campo; porém, para concentrações de até 6 g L-1, melhorou o controle da trapoeraba, na avaliação conduzida aos 28 dias após aplicação.<br>This work was developed with the objective of evaluating glyphosate efficacy for Bengal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) and other weeds desiccation, when combined to different concentrations of ammonium sulfate or urea. Three experiments were carried out with similar treatments: two in field conditions and one in greenhouse. Treatments applied in field conditions were: glyphosate at 360 g ha-1 a.e., isolated or combined to four concentrations of ammonium sulfate (2.5, 5, 10, and 20 g L-1) or urea (1.5, 3, 6, and 12 g L-1); glyphosate at 720 g ha-1 a.e., applied isolately; and checks without application. In greenhouse, for the specific control on Bengal dayflower, glyphosate rates were increased to 720 (isolated or in combination) and to 1,440 g ha-1 a.e. Ammonium sulfate addition to glyphosate spray solution increased field weed control, when concentrations up to 10 g L-1 were used. None of the glyphosate rates were efficient to control Bengal dayflower. Urea addition to spray solution did not improve weed control in field conditions; however, it increased Bengal dayflower control for concentrations up to 6 g L-1, at the evaluation after 28 days of application

Efficacy and safety of the CVnCoV SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine candidate in ten countries in Europe and Latin America (HERALD): a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial

Background: Additional safe and efficacious vaccines are needed to control the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of the CVnCoV SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine candidate. Methods: HERALD is a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 clinical trial conducted in 47 centres in ten countries in Europe and Latin America. By use of an interactive web response system and stratification by country and age group (18–60 years and ≥61 years), adults with no history of virologically confirmed COVID-19 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscularly either two 0·6 mL doses of CVnCoV containing 12 μg of mRNA or two 0·6 mL doses of 0·9% NaCl (placebo) on days 1 and 29. The primary efficacy endpoint was the occurrence of a first episode of virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 of any severity and caused by any strain from 15 days after the second dose. For the primary endpoint, the trial was considered successful if the lower limit of the CI was greater than 30%. Key secondary endpoints were the occurrence of a first episode of virologically confirmed moderate-to-severe COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 of any severity by age group. Primary safety outcomes were solicited local and systemic adverse events within 7 days after each dose and unsolicited adverse events within 28 days after each dose in phase 2b participants, and serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest up to 1 year after the second dose in phase 2b and phase 3 participants. Here, we report data up to June 18, 2021. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04652102, and EudraCT, 2020–003998–22, and is ongoing. Findings: Between Dec 11, 2020, and April 12, 2021, 39 680 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either CVnCoV (n=19 846) or placebo (n=19 834), of whom 19 783 received at least one dose of CVnCoV and 19 746 received at least one dose of placebo. After a mean observation period of 48·2 days (SE 0·2), 83 cases of COVID-19 occurred in the CVnCoV group (n=12 851) in 1735·29 person-years and 145 cases occurred in the placebo group (n=12 211) in 1569·87 person-years, resulting in an overall vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 of 48·2% (95·826% CI 31·0–61·4; p=0·016). Vaccine efficacy against moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was 70·7% (95% CI 42·5–86·1; CVnCoV 12 cases in 1735·29 person-years, placebo 37 cases in 1569·87 person-years). In participants aged 18–60 years, vaccine efficacy against symptomatic disease was 52·5% (95% CI 36·2–64·8; CVnCoV 71 cases in 1591·47 person-years, placebo, 136 cases in 1449·23 person-years). Too few cases occurred in participants aged 61 years or older (CVnCoV 12, placebo nine) to allow meaningful assessment of vaccine efficacy. Solicited adverse events, which were mostly systemic, were more common in CVnCoV recipients (1933 [96·5%] of 2003) than in placebo recipients (1344 [67·9%] of 1978), with 542 (27·1%) CVnCoV recipients and 61 (3·1%) placebo recipients reporting grade 3 solicited adverse events. The most frequently reported local reaction after any dose in the CVnCoV group was injection-site pain (1678 [83·6%] of 2007), with 22 grade 3 reactions, and the most frequently reported systematic reactions were fatigue (1603 [80·0%] of 2003) and headache (1541 [76·9%] of 2003). 82 (0·4%) of 19 783 CVnCoV recipients reported 100 serious adverse events and 66 (0·3%) of 19 746 placebo recipients reported 76 serious adverse events. Eight serious adverse events in five CVnCoV recipients and two serious adverse events in two placebo recipients were considered vaccination-related. None of the fatal serious adverse events reported (eight in the CVnCoV group and six in the placebo group) were considered to be related to study vaccination. Adverse events of special interest were reported for 38 (0·2%) participants in the CVnCoV group and 31 (0·2%) participants in the placebo group. These events were considered to be related to the trial vaccine for 14 (<0·1%) participants in the CVnCoV group and for five (<0·1%) participants in the placebo group. Interpretation: CVnCoV was efficacious in the prevention of COVID-19 of any severity and had an acceptable safety profile. Taking into account the changing environment, including the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, and timelines for further development, the decision has been made to cease activities on the CVnCoV candidate and to focus efforts on the development of next-generation vaccine candidates. Funding: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research and CureVac