General Report – Session 2

The complete title of Session two on case histories of unexpected behavior of foundations made reference to unusual soils, diverse environments, a wide range of foundation test methods and structures ranging from historic monuments to tall buildings and towers. In attempting to provide a narrative to the myriad papers submitted which match the session themes we must consider whether unanticipated foundation behavior can ever be described as unexpected. In every project Geotechnical Engineers are charged with predicting the response of structures composed of or built on naturally heterogeneous material. The process (which is not linear) consists of many stages including site investigation, design, and construction and monitoring. If undertaken properly, uncertainties should reduce as the process advances and there should be sufficient feedback and flexibility to allow knowledge gained to influence other stages of the process. Each project therefore is a case history in which knowledge gained can help to develop the empirical knowledge of the designer. Case histories are therefore an integral part of the education and development of all Geotechnical Engineers. Our report groups the papers submitted into four sections which can be roughly aligned to stages in the design process, namely; investigation, design, installation and performance. Many papers naturally contain contributions which address multiple headings and our classification, though subjective was to assign papers in the area where we felt the major contribution lay. Of the 32 papers submitted for this session, 5 deal primarily with investigation, 10 are focused on design, 5 consider the effects of installation and unsurprisingly, given the conference theme the vast majority (12 papers) considers foundation performance

acute effects of mercuric chloride on intracellular GSH levels and mercury distribution in the fish Oreochromis aureus

10.1007/BF01881036Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology402178-184BECT

Williams-Beuren syndrome in diverse populations

Williams–Beuren syndrome (WBS) is a common microdeletion syndrome characterized by a 1.5Mb deletion in 7q11.23. The phenotype of WBS has been well described in populations of European descent with not as much attention given to other ethnicities. In this study, individuals with WBS from diverse populations were assessed clinically and by facial analysis technology. Clinical data and images from 137 individuals with WBS were found in 19 countries with an average age of 11 years and female gender of 45%. The most common clinical phenotype elements were periorbital fullness and intellectual disability which were present in greater than 90% of our cohort. Additionally, 75% or greater of all individuals with WBS had malar flattening, long philtrum, wide mouth, and small jaw. Using facial analysis technology, we compared 286 Asian, African, Caucasian, and Latin American individuals with WBS with 286 gender and age matched controls and found that the accuracy to discriminate between WBS and controls was 0.90 when the entire cohort was evaluated concurrently. The test accuracy of the facial recognition technology increased significantly when the cohort was analyzed by specific ethnic population (P-value < 0.001 for all comparisons), with accuracies for Caucasian, African, Asian, and Latin American groups of 0.92, 0.96, 0.92, and 0.93, respectively. In summary, we present consistent clinical findings from global populations with WBS and demonstrate how facial analysis technology can support clinicians in making accurate WBS diagnoses

Large-Scale Whole-Genome Sequencing of Three Diverse Asian Populations in Singapore

Because of Singapore's unique history of immigration, whole-genome sequence analysis of 4,810 Singaporeans provides a snapshot of the genetic diversity across East, Southeast, and South Asia.</p

Recent progress in research on the pharmacological potential of mushrooms and prospects for their clinical application

International audienceFungi are considered one of the most diverse, ecologically significant, and economically important organisms on Earth. The edible and medicinal mushrooms have long been known by humans and were used by ancient civilizations not only as valuable food but also as medicines. Mushrooms are producers of high- and low-molecular-weight bioactive compounds (alkaloids, lectins, lipids, peptidoglycans, phenolics, polyketides, polysaccharides, proteins, polysaccharide-protein/peptides, ribosomal and non-ribosomal peptides, steroids, terpenoids, etc.) possessing more than 130 different therapeutic effects (analgesic, antibacterial, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antiplatelet, antiviral, cytotoxic, hepatoprotective, hypocholesterolemic, hypoglycemic, hypotensive, immunomodulatory, immunosuppressive, mitogenic/regenerative, etc.). The early record of Materia Medica shows evidence of using mushrooms for treatment of different diseases. Mushrooms were widely used in the traditional medicine of many countries around the world and became great resources for modern clinical and pharmacological research. However, the medicinal and biotechnological potential of mushrooms has not been fully investigated. This review discusses recent advances in research on the pharmacological potential of mushrooms and perspectives for their clinical application

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline