Is Radial Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy an Effective Treatment for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis in Adults?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this selective EBM review is to determine whether or not radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is an effective treatment in adults with chronic plantar fasciitis. STUDY DESIGN: Review of three English language primary studies published between 2008 and 2010. DATA SOURCES: Two randomized control trials and one cohort study analyzing the effects of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy on chronic plantar fasciitis were found using the OVID, Medline and Cochrane Databases. OUTCOMES MEASURED: Each of the three studies measured improvement in pain from baseline after patients were treated with ESWT. Pain levels were quantified using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS score assigned by each patient was a subjective pain severity score ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). RESULTS: The dichotomous data from the Gerdesmeyer et al. study and the Ibrahim et al. study showed statistically significant treatment success rates with the use of extracorporeal shock wave therapy to treat plantar fasciitis pain when compared to the control group, as determined by improvement in Visual Analog Scale scores. The continuous data provided by the Hofling et al. study showed a statistically significant improvement in overall pain, maximum pain, and pain with daily activities after participants received ESWT as compared to their pain levels prior to treatment. The Hofling et al. study did not find the reduction of night pain after ESWT to be statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Gerdesmeyer et al., Ibrahim et al., and Hofling et al. all provided data which showed statistically significant pain improvement following extracorporeal shock wave therapy in adult patients with chronic plantar fasciitis. This improvement was present in all three studies despite varying numbers of extracorporeal shock wave therapy treatment sessions and variable time frames between treatments. In order to maximize the efficacy of ESWT, continued research is needed to determine the optimal number of ESWT treatment sessions and the optimal time frame between treatment sessions

A Novel CCR5 Mutation Common in Sooty Mangabeys Reveals SIVsmm Infection of CCR5-Null Natural Hosts and Efficient Alternative Coreceptor Use In Vivo

In contrast to HIV infection in humans and SIV in macaques, SIV infection of natural hosts including sooty mangabeys (SM) is non-pathogenic despite robust virus replication. We identified a novel SM CCR5 allele containing a two base pair deletion (Δ2) encoding a truncated molecule that is not expressed on the cell surface and does not support SIV entry in vitro. The allele was present at a 26% frequency in a large SM colony, along with 3% for a CCR5Δ24 deletion allele that also abrogates surface expression. Overall, 8% of animals were homozygous for defective CCR5 alleles and 41% were heterozygous. The mutant allele was also present in wild SM in West Africa. CD8+ and CD4+ T cells displayed a gradient of CCR5 expression across genotype groups, which was highly significant for CD8+ cells. Remarkably, the prevalence of natural SIVsmm infection was not significantly different in animals lacking functional CCR5 compared to heterozygous and homozygous wild-type animals. Furthermore, animals lacking functional CCR5 had robust plasma viral loads, which were only modestly lower than wild-type animals. SIVsmm primary isolates infected both homozygous mutant and wild-type PBMC in a CCR5-independent manner in vitro, and Envs from both CCR5-null and wild-type infected animals used CXCR6, GPR15 and GPR1 in addition to CCR5 in transfected cells. These data clearly indicate that SIVsmm relies on CCR5-independent entry pathways in SM that are homozygous for defective CCR5 alleles and, while the extent of alternative coreceptor use in SM with CCR5 wild type alleles is uncertain, strongly suggest that SIVsmm tropism and host cell targeting in vivo is defined by the distribution and use of alternative entry pathways in addition to CCR5. SIVsmm entry through alternative pathways in vivo raises the possibility of novel CCR5-negative target cells that may be more expendable than CCR5+ cells and enable the virus to replicate efficiently without causing disease in the face of extremely restricted CCR5 expression seen in SM and several other natural host species

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective.

Immunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events

CD151 Represses Mammary Gland Development by Maintaining the Niches of Progenitor Cells

Tetraspanin CD151 interacts with laminin-binding integrins (i.e., α3β1, α6β1 and α6β4) and other cell surface molecules to control diverse cellular and physiological processes, ranging from cell adhesion, migration and survival to tissue architecture and homeostasis. Here, we report a novel role of CD151 in maintaining the branching morphogenesis and activity of progenitor cells during the pubertal development of mammary glands. In contrast to the disruption of laminin-binding integrins, CD151 removal in mice enhanced the tertiary branching in mammary glands by 2.4-fold and the number of terminal end buds (TEBs) by 30%, while having minimal influence on either primary or secondary ductal branching. Consistent with these morphological changes are the skewed distribution of basal/myoepithelial cells and a 3.2-fold increase in proliferating Ki67-positive cells. These novel observations suggest that CD151 impacts the branching morphogenesis of mammary glands by upregulating the activities of bipotent progenitor cells. Indeed, our subsequent analyses indicate that upon CD151 removal the proportion of CD24HiCD49fLowprogenitor cells in the mammary gland increased by 34%, and their proliferating and differentiating activities were significantly upregulated. Importantly, fibronectin, a pro-branching extracellular matrix (ECM) protein deposited underlying mammary epithelial or progenitor cells, increased by \u3e7.2-fold. Moreover, there was a concomitant increase in the expression and nuclear distribution of Slug, a transcription factor implicated in the maintenance of mammary progenitor cell activities. Taken together, our studies demonstrate that integrin-associated CD151 represses mammary branching morphogenesis by controlling progenitor cell activities, ECM integrity and transcription program

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health