Research needs for optimising wastewater-based epidemiology monitoring for public health protection

This is the final version. Available on open access from IWA Publishing via the DOI in this recordData availability statement: All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) is an unobtrusive method used to observe patterns in illicit drug use, poliovirus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The pandemic and need for surveillance measures have led to the rapid acceleration of WBE research and development globally. With the infrastructure available to monitor SARS-CoV-2 from wastewater in 58 countries globally, there is potential to expand targets and applications for public health protection, such as other viral pathogens, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), pharmaceutical consumption, or exposure to chemical pollutants. Some applications have been explored in academic research but are not used to inform public health decision-making. We reflect on the current knowledge of WBE for these applications and identify barriers and opportunities for expanding beyond SARS-CoV-2. This paper critically reviews the applications of WBE for public health and identifies the important research gaps for WBE to be a useful tool in public health. It considers possible uses for pathogenic viruses, AMR, and chemicals. It summarises the current evidence on the following: (1) the presence of markers in stool and urine; (2) environmental factors influencing persistence of markers in wastewater; (3) methods for sample collection and storage; (4) prospective methods for detection and quantification; (5) reducing uncertainties; and (6) further considerations for public health use.Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC

A future without forgiveness: beyond reconciliation in transitional justice

This article questions the promotion of reconciliation in transitional justice contexts. The article puts forward a critique of reconciliation in practice and questions mainstream definitions of reconciliation. The principle that these forms of reconciliation are desirable is also questioned. It is argued that examples of genuine reconciliation are difficult to find, that the promotion of reconciliation is frequently emphasised at the expense of substantive societal change, that emphasis on reconciliation (narrowly defined) risks taking agency away from those affected by conflict and that emphasis on reconciliation may obscure injustice and may promote acceptance of the status quo. The article suggests that reconciliation is not a necessary condition of, and should be de-emphasised in, transitional justice and, if it is promoted at all, that a different, less prescriptive notion of reconciliation is necessary

GEO-6 assessment for the pan-European region

Through this assessment, the authors and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) secretariat are providing an objective evaluation and analysis of the pan-European environment designed to support environmental decision-making at multiple scales. In this assessment, the judgement of experts is applied to existing knowledge to provide scientifically credible answers to policy-relevant questions. These questions include, but are not limited to the following:• What is happening to the environment in the pan-European region and why?• What are the consequences for the environment and the human population in the pan-European region?• What is being done and how effective is it?• What are the prospects for the environment in the future?• What actions could be taken to achieve a more sustainable future?<br/

Preventing Violence in Seven Countries: Global Convergence in Policies

Do governments take the measures that are supported by the best scientific evidence available? We present a brief review of the situation in: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Our findings show surprisingly similar developments across countries. While all seven countries are moving towards evidence-based decision making regarding policies and programs to prevent violence, there remain a number of difficulties before this end can be achieved. For example, there continue to be few randomized controlled trials or rigorous quasi-experimental studies on aggression and violence. Results from experimental research are essential to both policy makers and researchers to determine the effectiveness of programs as well as increase our knowledge of the problem. Additionally, all noted that media attention for violence is high in their country, often leading to management by crisis with the result that policies are not based on evidence, but instead seek to appease public outrage. And perhaps because of attendant organizational problems (i.e., in many countries violence prevention was not under the guise of one particular agency or ministry), most have not developed a coordinated policy focusing on the prevention of violence and physical aggression. It is hypothesized that leaders in democratic countries, who must run for election every 4 to 6 years, may feel a need to focus on short-term planning rather than long-term preventive policies since the costs, but not the benefits for the latter would be incurred while they still served in office. We also noted a general absence of expertise beyond those within scientific circles. The need for these ideas to be more widely accepted will be an essential ingredient to real and sustaining change. This means that there must be better communication and increased understanding between researchers and policy makers. Toward those ends, the recent establishment of the Campbell Collaboration, formed to provide international systematic reviews of program effectiveness, will make these results more available and accessible to politicians, administrators and those charged with making key policy decision

RADVAN: a randomised phase 2 trial of WBRT plus vandetanib for melanoma brain metastases - results and lessons learnt

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases occur in up to 75% of patients with advanced melanoma. Most are treated with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), with limited effectiveness. Vandetanib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor and rearranged during transfection tyrosine kinases, is a potent radiosensitiser in xenograft models. We compared WBRT with WBRT plus vandetanib in the treatment of patients with melanoma brain metastases. METHODS: In this double-blind, multi-centre, phase 2 trial patients with melanoma brain metastases were randomised to receive WBRT (30 Gy in 10 fractions) plus 3 weeks of concurrent vandetanib 100 mg once daily or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in brain (PFS brain). The main study was preceded by a safety run-in phase to confirm tolerability of the combination. A post-hoc analysis and literature review considered barriers to recruiting patients with melanoma brain metastases to clinical trials. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were recruited, six to the safety phase and 18 to the randomised phase. The study closed early due to poor recruitment. Median PFS brain was 3.3 months (90% confidence interval (CI): 1.6-5.6) in the vandetanib group and 2.5 months (90% CI: 0.2-4.8) in the placebo group (P=0.34). Median overall survival (OS) was 4.6 months (90% CI: 1.6-6.3) and 2.5 months (90% CI: 0.2-7.2), respectively (P=0.54). The most frequent adverse events were fatigue, alopecia, confusion and nausea. The most common barrier to study recruitment was availability of alternative treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of WBRT plus vandetanib was well tolerated. Compared with WBRT alone, there was no significant improvement in PFS brain or OS, although we are unable to provide a definitive result due to poor accrual. A review of barriers to trial accrual identified several factors that affect study recruitment in this difficult disease area