Arteria trigemina primitiva — radiological report of three cases and review of literature

The main aim of this paper is to present 3 cases of persistent (patent) primitive trigeminal artery incidentally revealed during various radiological examinations. The presence and function of these vessels in extrauterine life is sometimes associated with other vascular abnormalities, e.g. aneurysms, haemangiomas, moyamoya disease, but frequently found incidentally without any negative signs or symptoms. The presented cases of patients with primitive trigeminal artery clearly show that the reported ailments, which had made the diagnostic imagining necessary, were not associated with the patency of this artery

Global analysis of the mammalian RNA degradome reveals widespread miRNA-dependent and miRNA-independent endonucleolytic cleavage

The Ago2 component of the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC) is an endonuclease that cleaves mRNAs that base pair with high complementarity to RISC-bound microRNAs. Many examples of such direct cleavage have been identified in plants, but not in vertebrates, despite the conservation of catalytic capacity in vertebrate Ago2. We performed parallel analysis of RNA ends (PAREs), a deep sequencing approach that identifies 5′-phosphorylated, polyadenylated RNAs, to detect potential microRNA-directed mRNA cleavages in mouse embryo and adult tissues. We found that numerous mRNAs are potentially targeted for cleavage by endogenous microRNAs, but at very low levels relative to the mRNA abundance, apart from miR-151-5p-guided cleavage of the N4BP1 mRNA. We also find numerous examples of non-miRNA-directed cleavage, including cleavage of a group of mRNAs within a CA-repeat consensus sequence. The PARE analysis also identified many examples of adenylated small non-coding RNAs, including microRNAs, tRNA processing intermediates and various other small RNAs, consistent with adenylation being part of a widespread proof-reading and/or degradation pathway for small RNAs

Team adaptability and task cohesion as resources to the nonlinear dynamics of workload and sickness absenteeism in firefighter teams

The current study builds on the Nonlinear Dynamic Systems (NDS) perspective to test the assumption that change in sickness absenteeism is nonlinear, and that such change is due to workload, team adaptability and task cohesion. Participants were 37 firefighter teams (n = 250 individuals) from a main European capital city. The research hypotheses were tested using SPSS and the “cusp” package, in the statistical software R. The results suggest that change in sickness absenteeism behaviours over time is nonlinear, with the cusp catastrophe model predicting such behaviours better than the linear and logistic models. In our model, task cohesion functions as an asymmetry factor (i.e. the independent variable that determines the strength and discrepancy between the two stable states of the dependent variable) leading to linear change in sickness absenteeism. Interestingly, both workload and team adaptability function as bifurcation (i.e. the independent variable that determines the change between the two stable states of the order parameter) and asymmetry factors leading to nonlinear and linear change in sickness absenteeism over time. This study contributes to the growing evidence that incorporating the NDS perspective enables a better understanding of action teams, namely those working in extreme environments

Safety and immunogenicity of a self-amplifying RNA vaccine against COVID-19: COVAC1, a phase I, dose-ranging trial

Background: Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is a novel technology formulated as a low dose vaccine against COVID-19. Methods: A phase I first-in-human dose-ranging trial of a saRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and participating centres in London, UK, between 19th June to 28th October 2020. Participants received two intramuscular (IM) injections of LNP-nCoVsaRNA at six different dose levels, 0.1-10.0μg, given four weeks apart. An open-label dose escalation was followed by a dose evaluation. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week from enrolment, with follow-up at regular intervals (1-8 weeks). The binding and neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, immunoblot, SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation and wild type neutralisation assays. (The trial is registered: ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20). Findings: 192 healthy individuals with no history or serological evidence of COVID-19, aged 18-45 years were enrolled. The vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to vaccination. Seroconversion at week six whether measured by ELISA or immunoblot was related to dose (both p<0.001), ranging from 8% (3/39; 0.1μg) to 61% (14/23; 10.0μg) in ELISA and 46% (18/39; 0.3μg) to 87% (20/23; 5.0μg and 10.0μg) in a post-hoc immunoblot assay. Geometric mean (GM) anti-S IgG concentrations ranged from 74 (95% CI, 45-119) at 0.1μg to 1023 (468-2236) ng/mL at 5.0μg (p<0.001) and was not higher at 10.0μg. Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 by participant sera was measurable in 15% (6/39; 0.1μg) to 48% (11/23; 5.0μg) depending on dose level received. Interpretation: Encapsulated saRNA is safe for clinical development, is immunogenic at low dose levels but failed to induce 100% seroconversion. Modifications to optimise humoral responses are required to realise its potential as an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Funding: This study was co-funded by grants and gifts from the Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076), and the National Institute Health Research/Vaccine Task Force, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Pierre Andurand, Restore the Earth

Effectiveness of an intervention at construction worksites on work engagement, social support, physical workload, and need for recovery: results from a cluster randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To prolong sustainable healthy working lives of construction workers, a worksite prevention program was developed which aimed to improve the health and work ability of construction workers. The aim of the current study was to investigate the effectiveness of this program on social support at work, work engagement, physical workload and need for recovery.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Fifteen departments from six construction companies participated in this cluster randomized controlled trial; 8 departments (n=171 workers) were randomized to an intervention group and 7 departments (n=122 workers) to a control group. The intervention consisted of two individual training sessions of a physical therapist to lower the physical workload, a Rest-Break tool to improve the balance between work and recovery, and two empowerment training sessions to increase the influence of the construction workers at the worksite. Data on work engagement, social support at work, physical workload, and need for recovery were collected at baseline, and at three, six and 12 months after the start of the intervention using questionnaires.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No differences between the intervention and control group were found for work engagement, social support at work, and need for recovery. At 6 months follow-up, the control group reported a small but statistically significant reduction of physical workload.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The intervention neither improved social support nor work engagement, nor was it effective in reducing the physical workload and need for recovery among construction workers.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR1278</p

GaPP2, a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain in women:study protocol

Introduction: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) affects more than 1 million UK women with associated healthcare costs of £158 million annually. Current evidence supporting interventions when no underlying pathology is identified is very limited and treatment is frequently inadequate. Gabapentin (a GABA analogue) is efficacious and often well tolerated in other chronic pain conditions. We have completed a successful pilot randomised controlled trial (GaPP1) and here describe the protocol for the definitive multicentre trial to assess the efficacy of gabapentin in the management of CPP in women (GaPP2).Methods and analysis: We plan to perform a double blind placebo controlled randomised multi-centre clinical trial, recruiting 300 women with CPP from more than 8 NHS hospitals within the UK. After randomisation, women will titrate their medication (gabapentin or placebo) over a 4-week period to a maximum of 2700mg or placebo equivalent and will then maintain a stable dose for a 12 week period. Response to treatment will be monitored with validated questionnaires and co-primary outcome measures of average and worst pain scores will be employed. The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that treatment with gabapentin has the potential to provide an effective oral treatment to alleviate pain in women with CPP in the absence of any obvious pelvic pathology.Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Coventry and Warwick Research Ethics Committee (REC 15/WM/0036). Data will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. We will make the information obtained from the study available to the public through national bodies and charities.Trial registration number: ISRCTN7745176

Gabapentin for chronic pelvic pain in women (GaPP2): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Chronic pelvic pain affects 2–24% of women worldwide and evidence for medical treatments is scarce. Gabapentin is effective in treating some chronic pain conditions. We aimed to measure the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in women with chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology. Methods: We performed a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 39 UK hospital centres. Eligible participants were women with chronic pelvic pain (with or without dysmenorrhoea or dyspareunia) of at least 3 months duration. Inclusion criteria were 18–50 years of age, use or willingness to use contraception to avoid pregnancy, and no obvious pelvic pathology at laparoscopy, which must have taken place at least 2 weeks before consent but less than 36 months previously. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive gabapentin (titrated to a maximum dose of 2700 mg daily) or matching placebo for 16 weeks. The online randomisation system minimised allocations by presence or absence of dysmenorrhoea, psychological distress, current use of hormonal contraceptives, and hospital centre. The appearance, route, and administration of the assigned intervention were identical in both groups. Patients, clinicians, and research staff were unaware of the trial group assignments throughout the trial. Participants were unmasked once they had provided all outcome data at week 16–17, or sooner if a serious adverse event requiring knowledge of the study drug occurred. The dual primary outcome measures were worst and average pain scores assessed separately on a numerical rating scale in weeks 13–16 after randomisation, in the intention-to-treat population. Self-reported adverse events were assessed according to intention-to-treat principles. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISCRTN77451762. Findings: Participants were screened between Nov 30, 2015, and March 6, 2019, and 306 were randomly assigned (153 to gabapentin and 153 to placebo). There were no significant between-group differences in both worst and average numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 13–16 weeks after randomisation. The mean worst NRS pain score was 7·1 (standard deviation [SD] 2·6) in the gabapentin group and 7·4 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·4 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and −1·2 (SD 2·1) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·20 [97·5% CI −0·81 to 0·42]; p=0·47). The mean average NRS pain score was 4·3 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and 4·5 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·1 (SD 2·0) in the gabapentin group and −0·9 (SD 1·8) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·18 [97·5% CI −0·71 to 0·35]; p=0·45). More women had a serious adverse event in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group (10 [7%] of 153 in the gabapentin group compared with 3 [2%] of 153 in the placebo group; p=0·04). Dizziness, drowsiness, and visual disturbances were more common in the gabapentin group. Interpretation: This study was adequately powered, but treatment with gabapentin did not result in significantly lower pain scores in women with chronic pelvic pain, and was associated with higher rates of side-effects than placebo. Given the increasing reports of abuse and evidence of potential harms associated with gabapentin use, it is important that clinicians consider alternative treatment options to off-label gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology. Funding: National Institute for Health Research

Musculoskeletal disorders in shipyard industry: prevalence, health care use, and absenteeism

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the well-known risk factors for the occurrence of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) also play an important role in the determining consequences of MSD in terms of sickness absence and health care use. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 853 shipyard employees. Data were collected by questionnaire on physical and psychosocial workload, need for recovery, perceived general health, occurrence of musculoskeletal complaints, and health care use during the past year. Retrospective data on absenteeism were also available from the company register. RESULTS: In total, 37%, 22%, and 15% of employees reported complaints of low back, shoulder/neck, and hand/wrist during the past 12 months, respectively. Among all employees with at least one MSD, 27% visited a physician at least once and 20% took at least one period of sick leave. Various individual and work-related factors were associated with the occurrence of MSD. Health care use and absenteeism were strongest influenced by chronicity of musculoskeletal complaints and comorbidity with other musculoskeletal complaints and, to a lesser extent, by work-related factors. CONCLUSION: In programmes aimed at preventing the unfavourable consequences of MSD in terms of sickness absence and health care use it is important to identify the (individual) factors that determine the development of chronicity of complaints. These factors may differ from the well-know risk factors for the occurrence of MSD that are targeted in primary prevention

Gabapentin for chronic pelvic pain in women (GaPP2):a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundChronic pelvic pain affects 2–24% of women worldwide and evidence for medical treatments is scarce. Gabapentin is effective in treating some chronic pain conditions. We aimed to measure the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in women with chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.MethodsWe performed a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 39 UK hospital centres. Eligible participants were women with chronic pelvic pain (with or without dysmenorrhoea or dyspareunia) of at least 3 months duration. Inclusion criteria were 18–50 years of age, use or willingness to use contraception to avoid pregnancy, and no obvious pelvic pathology at laparoscopy, which must have taken place at least 2 weeks before consent but less than 36 months previously. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive gabapentin (titrated to a maximum dose of 2700 mg daily) or matching placebo for 16 weeks. The online randomisation system minimised allocations by presence or absence of dysmenorrhoea, psychological distress, current use of hormonal contraceptives, and hospital centre. The appearance, route, and administration of the assigned intervention were identical in both groups. Patients, clinicians, and research staff were unaware of the trial group assignments throughout the trial. Participants were unmasked once they had provided all outcome data at week 16–17, or sooner if a serious adverse event requiring knowledge of the study drug occurred. The dual primary outcome measures were worst and average pain scores assessed separately on a numerical rating scale in weeks 13–16 after randomisation, in the intention-to-treat population. Self-reported adverse events were assessed according to intention-to-treat principles. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISCRTN77451762.FindingsParticipants were screened between Nov 30, 2015, and March 6, 2019, and 306 were randomly assigned (153 to gabapentin and 153 to placebo). There were no significant between-group differences in both worst and average numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 13–16 weeks after randomisation. The mean worst NRS pain score was 7·1 (standard deviation [SD] 2·6) in the gabapentin group and 7·4 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·4 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and −1·2 (SD 2·1) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·20 [97·5% CI −0·81 to 0·42]; p=0·47). The mean average NRS pain score was 4·3 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and 4·5 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·1 (SD 2·0) in the gabapentin group and −0·9 (SD 1·8) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·18 [97·5% CI −0·71 to 0·35]; p=0·45). More women had a serious adverse event in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group (10 [7%] of 153 in the gabapentin group compared with 3 [2%] of 153 in the placebo group; p=0·04). Dizziness, drowsiness, and visual disturbances were more common in the gabapentin group.InterpretationThis study was adequately powered, but treatment with gabapentin did not result in significantly lower pain scores in women with chronic pelvic pain, and was associated with higher rates of side-effects than placebo. Given the increasing reports of abuse and evidence of potential harms associated with gabapentin use, it is important that clinicians consider alternative treatment options to off-label gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.FundingNational Institute for Health Research