International Child Abduction and Children\u27s Rights: Two Means to the Same End

The Hague Convention aims to deter future abductors and demonstrate mutual respect for the laws of its member states, while presumably serving the best interests of the child. It operates as a jurisdictional mechanism by reinstating the status quo prior to the removal through the prompt return of the child to his or her place of habitual residence. This return, as clearly stated in the Hague Convention itself, bears no effect on the merits of any existing or future custody dispute between the parents. The Hague Convention demands that contracting states respect past or future decisions pertaining to custody decided in the place of habitual residence. Though the Hague Convention essentially solves matters of private international law (i.e., questions of proper forum and choice of law), domestic courts retain discretion to deny return on several technical and substantive grounds. These exceptions to return, provided for in the Hague Convention, necessitate a limited examination by courts of the relationships among both parents and the abducted child. In recent years, however, courts-and the majority of scholars writing on the issue-have questioned the narrow framework in which they are obliged to operate when deciding whether to return a child. They have looked at how adjudication proceedings under the Hague Convention coincide with human rights regimes, with a particular focus on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As will be discussed, more and more writers have opined that in order to satisfy the obligations of the CRC, courts must expand the narrowly construed exceptions to an order of return. This Article will examine whether these assertions have merit and whether an adjustment of the Hague Convention and the courts\u27 application of it is required in order for states to comply with their human rights obligations. The starting point for this assessment will be an explanation of the basic premises and content of the Hague Convention and the CRC

International Child Abduction and Children\u27s Rights: Two Means to the Same End

The Hague Convention aims to deter future abductors and demonstrate mutual respect for the laws of its member states, while presumably serving the best interests of the child. It operates as a jurisdictional mechanism by reinstating the status quo prior to the removal through the prompt return of the child to his or her place of habitual residence. This return, as clearly stated in the Hague Convention itself, bears no effect on the merits of any existing or future custody dispute between the parents. The Hague Convention demands that contracting states respect past or future decisions pertaining to custody decided in the place of habitual residence. Though the Hague Convention essentially solves matters of private international law (i.e., questions of proper forum and choice of law), domestic courts retain discretion to deny return on several technical and substantive grounds. These exceptions to return, provided for in the Hague Convention, necessitate a limited examination by courts of the relationships among both parents and the abducted child. In recent years, however, courts-and the majority of scholars writing on the issue-have questioned the narrow framework in which they are obliged to operate when deciding whether to return a child. They have looked at how adjudication proceedings under the Hague Convention coincide with human rights regimes, with a particular focus on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As will be discussed, more and more writers have opined that in order to satisfy the obligations of the CRC, courts must expand the narrowly construed exceptions to an order of return. This Article will examine whether these assertions have merit and whether an adjustment of the Hague Convention and the courts\u27 application of it is required in order for states to comply with their human rights obligations. The starting point for this assessment will be an explanation of the basic premises and content of the Hague Convention and the CRC

Mepolizumab versus placebo for asthma

Background Mepolizumab is a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-5 (IL-5), the main cytokine involved in the activation of eosinophils, which in turn causes airway inflammation. Recent studies have suggested these agents may have a role in reducing exacerbations and improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There are no recommendations for the use of mepolizumab in adults or children in the recent update of the BTS/SIGN guidelines (BTS/SIGN 2014). Objectives To compare the effects of mepolizumab with placebo on exacerbations and HRQoL in adults and children with chronic asthma. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register (CAGR) of trials, clinical trial registries, manufacturers' websites and the reference lists of included studies. Searches were conducted in November 2013 and updated in November 2014. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials comparing mepolizumab versus placebo in adults and children with asthma. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a random-effects model. We used standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Main results Eight studies on 1707 participants met the inclusion criteria. Only two studies included children (over 12 years of age), but they did not report separate findings for the adolescents. Seven studies involved intravenous mepolizumab alone; one included a subcutaneous arm. There was heterogeneity in the severity and clinical pattern of asthma among the participants in the eight studies, varying from mild to moderate atopic asthma, to persistent asthma and eosinophilic asthma with recurrent exacerbations. Selection bias was a concern in several of the studies included in this review. Four trials compared intravenous mepolizumab to placebo in relation to HRQoL. Two studies measured scores from the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), which showed a non-significant difference between mepolizumab and placebo (mean difference (MD) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) − 0.01 to 0.44; participants = 682), in the direction favouring mepolizumab. The third study used the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and found a significant difference between mepolizumab and placebo (MD 6.40, 95% CI 3.15 to 9.65; participants = 576), which indicated a clinically important benefit favouring mepolizumab. A fourth study noted that there was no significant difference but did not provide any data. The two studies in people with eosinophilic asthma showed a reduction in clinically significant exacerbation rates (Risk Ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.64; participants = 690). However, an analysis of four studies that were not confined to people with eosinophilic asthma indicated considerable heterogeneity and no significant difference in people with one or more exacerbations between mepolizumab and placebo using a random-effects model (Risk Ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.31; participants = 468; I2 = 59%).The analysis of serious adverse events indicated a significant difference favouring mepolizumab (Risk ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.80; participants = 1441; studies = 5; I2 = 0%). It was not possible to combine the results for adverse events, and we deemed the quality of this evidence to be low. A single study compared subcutaneous mepolizumab to placebo in 385 adults with severe eosinophilic asthma and found an improvement in HRQoL scores and a reduction in asthma exacerbations, including exacerbations requiring admission to hospital. Authors' conclusions It is not possible to draw firm conclusions from this review with respect to the role of mepolizumab in patients with asthma. Our confidence in the results of this review are limited by the fact that the intravenous route is not currently licensed for mepolizumab, and the evidence for the currently licenced subcutaneous route is limited to a single study in participants with severe eosinophilic asthma. The currently available studies provide evidence that mepolizumab can lead to an improvement in health-related quality of life scores and reduce asthma exacerbations in people with severe eosinophilic asthma. Further research is needed to clarify which subgroups of patients with asthma could potentially benefit from this treatment. Dosage, ideal dosing regimens and duration of treatment need to be clarified, as the studies included in this review differed in their protocols. There are no studies reporting results from children, so we cannot comment on treatment for this age group. At the present time, larger studies using licenced treatment regimens are required to establish the role of mepolizumab in the treatment of severe asthma

Systematic Approaches towards the Development of Host-Directed Antiviral Therapeutics

Since the onset of antiviral therapy, viral resistance has compromised the clinical value of small-molecule drugs targeting pathogen components. As intracellular parasites, viruses complete their life cycle by hijacking a multitude of host-factors. Aiming at the latter rather than the pathogen directly, host-directed antiviral therapy has emerged as a concept to counteract evolution of viral resistance and develop broad-spectrum drug classes. This approach is propelled by bioinformatics analysis of genome-wide screens that greatly enhance insights into the complex network of host-pathogen interactions and generate a shortlist of potential gene targets from a multitude of candidates, thus setting the stage for a new era of rational identification of drug targets for host-directed antiviral therapies. With particular emphasis on human immunodeficiency virus and influenza virus, two major human pathogens, we review screens employed to elucidate host-pathogen interactions and discuss the state of database ontology approaches applicable to defining a therapeutic endpoint. The value of this strategy for drug discovery is evaluated, and perspectives for bioinformatics-driven hit identification are outlined

Stereotypical Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia B-Cell Receptors Recognize Survival Promoting Antigens on Stromal Cells

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common leukemia in the Western world. Survival of CLL cells depends on their close contact with stromal cells in lymphatic tissues, bone marrow and blood. This microenvironmental regulation of CLL cell survival involves the stromal secretion of chemo- and cytokines as well as the expression of adhesion molecules. Since CLL survival may also be driven by antigenic stimulation through the B-cell antigen receptor (BCR), we explored the hypothesis that these processes may be linked to each other. We tested if stromal cells could serve as an antigen reservoir for CLL cells, thus promoting CLL cell survival by stimulation through the BCR. As a proof of principle, we found that two CLL BCRs with a common stereotyped heavy chain complementarity-determining region 3 (previously characterized as “subset 1”) recognize antigens highly expressed in stromal cells – vimentin and calreticulin. Both antigens are well-documented targets of autoantibodies in autoimmune disorders. We demonstrated that vimentin is displayed on the surface of viable stromal cells and that it is present and bound by the stereotyped CLL BCR in CLL-stroma co-culture supernatant. Blocking the vimentin antigen by recombinant soluble CLL BCR under CLL-stromal cell co-culture conditions reduces stroma-mediated anti-apoptotic effects by 20–45%. We therefore conclude that CLL BCR stimulation by stroma-derived antigens can contribute to the protective effect that the stroma exerts on CLL cells. This finding sheds a new light on the understanding of the pathobiology of this so far mostly incurable disease

PI3K Signaling in Normal B Cells and Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL).

B cells provide immunity to extracellular pathogens by secreting a diverse repertoire of antibodies with high affinity and specificity for exposed antigens. The B cell receptor (BCR) is a transmembrane antibody, which facilitates the clonal selection of B cells producing secreted antibodies of the same specificity. The diverse antibody repertoire is generated by V(D)J recombination of heavy and light chain genes, whereas affinity maturation is mediated by activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID)-mediated mutagenesis. These processes, which are essential for the generation of adaptive humoral immunity, also render B cells susceptible to chromosomal rearrangements and point mutations that in some cases lead to cancer. In this chapter, we will review the central role of PI3K s in mediating signals from the B cell receptor that not only facilitate the development of functional B cell repertoire, but also support the growth and survival of neoplastic B cells, focusing on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) B cells. Perhaps because of the central role played by PI3K in BCR signaling, B cell leukemia and lymphomas are the first diseases for which a PI3K inhibitor has been approved for clinical use

Incidence of cancer and overall risk of mortality in individuals treated with raltegravir-based and non-raltegravir-based combination antiretroviral therapy regimens

Objectives: There are currently few data on the long-term risk of cancer and death in individuals taking raltegravir (RAL). The aim of this analysis was to evaluate whether there is evidence for an association. Methods: The EuroSIDA cohort was divided into three groups: those starting RAL-based combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) on or after 21 December 2007 (RAL); a historical cohort (HIST) of individuals adding a new antiretroviral (ARV) drug (not RAL) to their cART between 1 January 2005 and 20 December 2007, and a concurrent cohort (CONC) of individuals adding a new ARV drug (not RAL) to their cART on or after 21 December 2007. Baseline characteristics were compared using logistic regression. The incidences of newly diagnosed malignancies and death were compared using Poisson regression. Results: The RAL cohort included 1470 individuals [with 4058 person-years of follow-up (PYFU)] compared with 3787 (4472 PYFU) and 4467 (10 691 PYFU) in the HIST and CONC cohorts, respectively. The prevalence of non-AIDS-related malignancies prior to baseline tended to be higher in the RAL cohort vs. the HIST cohort [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95–1.80] and vs. the CONC cohort (aOR 1.89; 95% CI 1.37–2.61). In intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (events: RAL, 50; HIST, 45; CONC, 127), the incidence of all new malignancies was 1.11 (95% CI 0.84–1.46) per 100 PYFU in the RAL cohort vs. 1.20 (95% CI 0.90–1.61) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.70–0.99) in the HIST and CONC cohorts, respectively. After adjustment, there was no evidence for a difference in the risk of malignancies [adjusted rate ratio (RR) 0.73; 95% CI 0.47–1.14 for RALvs. HIST; RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.65–1.39 for RALvs. CONC] or mortality (adjusted RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.53–1.43 for RALvs. HIST; RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.76–1.72 for RALvs. CONC). Conclusions: We found no evidence for an oncogenic risk or poorer survival associated with using RAL compared with control groups.Peer reviewe