463 research outputs found

    Medial displacement calcaneal osteotomy: Loss of correction with varying drilling techniques

    No full text
    Introduction: Joint preserving surgery for flatfoot reconstruction utilizes correction of bony malalignment and medial soft tissue reconstruction. A medial displacement calcaneal osteotomy (MDCO) can be an essential adjunct to deformity correction and good patient outcomes. Our cadaveric study compares three different surgical techniques utilizing two cannulated screws to best maintain medial translation of the calcaneal osteotomies. Materials and methods: Fifteen above knee fresh-frozen, matched pair cadaveric specimens (30 limbs) were randomized equally to three groups. MDCO were performed on all specimens, followed by manual 10¬†mm translation. The groups consisted of a ‚Äúsimultaneous drilling,‚ÄĚ ‚Äústaggered drilling,‚ÄĚ and a control group, which involved simultaneous drilling of only the near cortex. Following screw fixation, the calcaneal tuberosity was manually translated in a lateral direction. The loss of correction was measured in millimeters. Results: The ‚Äúsimultaneous‚ÄĚ drilling group experienced the greatest mean loss of correction at 2.6¬†mm (range 1.37‚Äď3.48¬†mm). The ‚Äústaggered‚ÄĚ group showed an average loss of 1.16¬†mm (range 0.36‚Äď2.67¬†mm). The control group demonstrated the greatest maintenance of correction with a mean loss of 0.036¬†mm (range 0.01‚Äď0.06¬†mm). Conclusions: MDCO realigns the hindfoot adding support to the medial soft tissue reconstruction during flatfoot correction. Loss of initial correction may result in residual deformity and poor long-term outcomes. Our study demonstrates that simultaneous drilling of only the tuberosity near cortex prior to screw fixation was the best at maintaining osteotomy correction. Level of evidence: : Level V, Cadaveric stud

    Anomalies in the review process and interpretation of the evidence in the NICE guideline for chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis

    Get PDF
    Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive-behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial.We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which 'downgraded' the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence.We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability

    A collaborative and near-comprehensive North Pacific humpback whale photo-ID dataset

    Get PDF
    Abstract We present an ocean-basin-scale dataset that includes tail fluke photographic identification (photo-ID) and encounter data for most living individual humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the North Pacific Ocean. The dataset was built through a broad collaboration combining 39 separate curated photo-ID catalogs, supplemented with community science data. Data from throughout the North Pacific were aggregated into 13 regions, including six breeding regions, six feeding regions, and one migratory corridor. All images were compared with minimal pre-processing using a recently developed image recognition algorithm based on machine learning through artificial intelligence; this system is capable of rapidly detecting matches between individuals with an estimated 97‚Äď99% accuracy. For the 2001‚Äď2021 study period, a total of 27,956 unique individuals were documented in 157,350 encounters. Each individual was encountered, on average, in 5.6 sampling periods (i.e., breeding and feeding seasons), with an annual average of 87% of whales encountered in more than one season. The combined dataset and image recognition tool represents a living and accessible resource for collaborative, basin-wide studies of a keystone marine mammal in a time of rapid ecological change

    Anomalies in the review process and interpretation of the evidence in the NICE guideline for chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis

    Get PDF
    Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive-behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial.We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which 'downgraded' the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence.We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability

    Annual (2023) taxonomic update of RNA-directed RNA polymerase-encoding negative-sense RNA viruses (realm Riboviria: kingdom Orthornavirae: phylum Negarnaviricota)

    No full text
    Laulima Government Solutions, LLC, prime contract with the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) under Contract No. HHSN272201800013C. J.H.K. performed this work as an employee of Tunnell Government Services (TGS), a subcontractor of Laulima Government Solutions, LLC, under Contract No. HHSN272201800013C. U.J.B. was supported by the Division of Intramural Resarch, NIAID. This work was also funded in part by Contract No. HSHQDC15-C-00064 awarded by DHS S and T for the management and operation of The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Centre, a federally funded research and development centre operated by the Battelle National Biodefense Institute (V.W.); and NIH contract HHSN272201000040I/HHSN27200004/D04 and grant R24AI120942 (N.V., R.B.T.). S.S. acknowledges support from the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (MAFES), USDA-ARS project 58-6066-9-033 and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hatch Project, under Accession Number 1‚ÄČ021‚ÄČ494.National Institutes of Health. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease. Division of Clinical Research. Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick. Frederick, MD, USA.Hokkaido Research Organization. Agricultural Research Department. Ornamental Plants and Vegetables Research Center. Takikawa, Hokkaido, Japan.United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service. US Horticultural Research Laboratory. Fort Pierce, FL, USA.D.I. Ivanovsky Institute of Virology of N.F. Gamaleya National Center on Epidemiology and Microbiology of Ministry of Health of Russian Federation. Moscow, Russia.University of Ljubljana. Faculty of Medicine. Institute of Microbiology and Immunology. Ljubljana, Slovenia.Instituto Nacional de Investigaci√≥n y Tecnolog√≠a Agraria y Alimentaria - Campus de Montegancedo. Departamento de Biotecnolog√≠a-Biolog√≠a Vegetal. Centro de Biotecnolog√≠a y Gen√≥mica de Plantas. Pozuelo de Alarc√≥n / Universidad Polit√©cnica de Madrid. Escuela T√©cnica Superior de Ingenier√≠a Agron√≥mica, Alimentaria y de Biosistemas. Madrid, Spain.University of Georgia. Insitute of Bioinformatics. Department of Infectious Diseases, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Center for Ecology of Infectious Diseases. Athens, GA, USA.Greifswald-Insel Riems. Institute of Novel and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut. Greifswald, Germany.Mississippi State University. Department of Biological Sciences. Mississippi State, MS, USA.ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute. Division of Plant Pathology. New Delhi, India.Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut. Institute of Diagnostic Virology. Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.Instituto Nacional de Tecnolog√≠a Agropecuaria-Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient√≠ficas y T√©cnicas. Unidad de Fitopatologia y Modelizacion Agricola. C√≥rdoba, Argentina.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Viral Special Pathogens Branch. Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology. Atlanta, GA, USA.Philipps-University Marburg. Institute of Virology. Marburg, Germany.Colorado State University. Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology. Fort Collins, CO, USA.Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness, Geelong. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. Australia.Agroscope. Virology-Phytoplasmology Laboratory. Nyon, Switzerland.University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center. Albuquerque, NM, USA.Columbia University. Mailman School of Public Health. Center for Infection and Immunity, and Department of Epidemiology. New York, USA.French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Heath Safety. Laboratory of Ploufragan-Plouzan√©-Niort. Ploufragan, France.National Institutes of Health. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Laboratory of Infectious Diseases. RNA Viruses Section. Bethesda, MD, USA.University of California. Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry. Irvine, CA, USA.The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Galveston, TX, USA.University of the Free State. National Health Laboratory Service and Division of Virology. Division of Virology. Bloemfontein, South Africa.Faculty of Life Sciences, Humboldt-Universit√§t zu Berlin. Division Phytomedicine. Berlin, Germany.Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO, USA.Southwest University. Citrus Research Institute. National Citrus Engineering and Technology Research Center. Beibei, Chongqing, PR China.Instituto de Salud Carlos III. National Microbiology Center. Respiratory Virus and Influenza Unit. Madrid, Spain.Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Department of Microbiology and Immunology. Bronx, NY, USA.Unite des Virus Emergents -Aix-Marseille Univ-IRD 190-Inserm 1207. Marseille, France.ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute. Centre for Agricultural Bioinformatics. New Delhi, India.The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited. Auckland, New Zealand.National Institutes of Health. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick. Frederick, MD, USA.Universidad de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales. CIDEFI. La Plata, Argentina.The Scripps Research Institute. Department of Immunology and Microbiology IMM-6. La Jolla, CA, USA.The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Department of Microbiology and Immunology. World Reference Center for Emerging Viruses and Arboviruses. Galveston, TX, USA.Wageningen Bioveterinary Research. Department of Virology. Lelystad, Netherlands.Instituto de Patolog√≠a Vegetal. Centro de Investigaciones Agropecuarias. Instituto Nacional de Tecnolog√≠a Agropecuaria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient√≠ficas y T√©cnicas. Unidad de Fitopatolog√≠a y Modelizaci√≥n Agr√≠cola. C√≥rdoba, Argentina.ANSES Animal Health Laboratory. UMR 1161 Virology ANSES/INRAE/ENVA. Maisons-Alfort, France.United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Frederick, MD, USA.Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche. Istituto per la Protezione Sostenibile delle Piante. Bari, Italy.The University of Queensland. Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation. St. Lucia, QLD, Australia.Centre International de Hautes √©tudes agronomiques m√©diterran√©ennes. Istituto Agronomico Mediterraneo di Bari, Valenzano, Italy.Universit√§t Berlin, Humboldt-Universit√§t zu Berlin. Institute of Virology, Charit√©-Universit√§tsmedizin Berlin. Berlin, Germany.University of Pittsburgh. School of Medicine. Pittsburgh, PA, USA.Robert Koch Institut. Berlin, Germany.University of Warwick. School of Life Sciences. Coventry, UK.Hacettepe University. Faculty of Medicine. Department of Medical Microbiology. Virology Unit. Ankara, Turkey.Museum Support Center. Smithsonian Institution. Walter Reed Biosystematics Unit. Suitland, MD, USA / Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. One Health Branch. Silver Spring, MD, USA / Smithsonian Institution-National Museum of Natural History. Department of Entomology. Washington, DC, USA / China National Rice Research Institute. Hangzhou, PR China.University of Cambridge. Department of Pathology. Cambridge, UK.Animal and Plant Health Agency. eybridge, Surrey, UK.World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland.Embrapa Cassava and Fruits. Cruz das Almas, BA, Brazil.Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. Institute of Biochemistry and Biotechnology. Halle/Saale, Germany.Instituto de Biotecnolog√≠a y Biolog√≠a Molecular. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas. La Plata, Argentina.Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. New York, NY, USA.Brandenburg State Office of Rural Development. Agriculture and Land Consolidation. Frankfurt, Germany.Humboldt-Universit√§t Zu Berlin. Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences. Division Phytomedicine. Berlin, Germany.Ministry of Education. Jilin University. College of Veterinary Medicine. Key Laboratory of Zoonoses Research. State Key Laboratory for Zoonotic Diseases. Changchun, PR China / Georgetown University. School of Medicine. Division of Biomedical Graduate Research Organization. Department of Microbiology and Immunology. Washington, DC, USA.Institute of Vertebrate Biology of the Czech Academy of Sciences. Brno, CzechiaBoston University. National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories. Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine. Department of Virology, Immunology and Microbiology. Boston, MA, USA.Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut. Institute of Novel and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany.Bernhard-Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine. WHO Collaborating Centre for Arboviruses and Hemorrhagic Fever Reference and Research. Department of Virology. Hamburg, Germany.United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service / United States Naval Academy. Floral and Nursery Plants Research Unit. Beltsville, MD, USA.Hosei University. Department of Clinical Plant Science. Koganei, Tokyo, Japan.Kochi Agricultural Research Center. Nankoku, Kochi, Japan.University of Helsinki. Department of Virology. Medicum, Helsinki, Finland.University of Zurich. Institute of Veterinary Pathology, Vetsuisse Faculty. Zurich, Switzerland.Auckland University of Technology. The School of Science. Auckland, New Zealand.Yamagata University. Faculty of Medicine. Department of Infectious Diseases. Yamagata, Japan / Osaka Metropolitan University. Graduate School of Veterinary Science / Osaka Metropolitan University. International Research Center for Infectious Diseases. Izumisano, Osaka, Japan.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fort Collins, CO, USA.Murdoch University. School of Veterinary Medicine. Murdoch, WA, Australia.Kobe University. Graduate School of Agricultural Science. Kobe, Hyogo, Japan.Huazhong Agricultural University. State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology. Wuhan, Hubei Province, PR China.International Rice Research Institute. College. Los Ba√Īos, Laguna, Philippines.Charit√©-Universit√§tsmedizin Berlin. Freie Universit√§t Berlin. Corporate Member. Humboldt-Universit√§t zu Berlin. Berlin Institute of Health. Institute of Virology. Berlin, Germany.Slovak Academy of Sciences. Biomedical Research Center. Institute of Virology. Bratislava, Slovakia.Link√∂ping University. Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences. Link√∂ping, Sweden.Okayama University. Institute of Plant Science and Resources. Kurashiki, Japan.National Institutes of Health. National Library of Medicine. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Bethesda, MD, USA.Institut Pasteur. Universit√© Paris Cit√©. CNRS UMR6047. Archaeal Virology Unit. Paris, France.National Agriculture and Food Research Organization. Institute for Plant Protection. Tsukuba, Ibaraki, JapanUS Geological Survey Western Fisheries Research Center. Seattle, Washington, USA.KU Leuven. Rega Institute. Zoonotic Infectious Diseases unit / University Hospitals Leuven. Department of Laboratory Medicine. Leuven, Belgium.The Ohio State University. College of Veterinary Medicine. Department of Veterinary Biosciences. Columbus, OH, USA.Ningbo University. Institute of Plant Virology. Ningbo, PR China.Illumina-China. Beijing, PR China.University of Louisville. School of Medicine. Center for Predictive Medicine for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology. Louisville, KY, USA.The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited / The University of Auckland. School of Biological Sciences. Auckland, New Zealand.KU Leuven. Rega Institute. Zoonotic Infectious Diseases unit. Leuven, Belgium.FIND - The Global Alliance for Diagnostics. Geneva, Switzerland.Pontificia Universidad Cat√≥lica de Valpara√≠so-Campus Curauma. Instituto de Biolog√≠a-Laboratorio de Gen√©tica Molecular. Valpara√≠so, Chile.United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service. Toledo, OH, USA.Folkhalsomyndigheten. Stockholm, Sweden.Yamagata University. Department of Agriculture. Tsuruoka, Japan.Washington State University. Irrigated Agricultural Research and Extension Center. Department of Plant Pathology. Prosser, WA, USA.Utsunomiya University. Utsunomiya, Japan.Universitat Polit√®cnica de Val√®ncia-Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cient√≠ficas. Instituto de Biolog√≠a Molecular y Celular de Plantas. Valencia, Spain.Utsunomiya University. School of Agriculture. Utsunomiya, Japan.Novosibirsk State University. Novosibirsk Oblast, Russia.University of Wisconsin-Madison. Department of Pathobiological Sciences. Influenza Research Institute. Madison, USA.University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna. Institute of Virology. Vienna, Austria.Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences. College of Medicine. Dubai, United Arab Emirates.Minist√©rio da Sa√ļde. Secretaria de Vigil√Ęncia em Sa√ļde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Oklahoma State University. Institute for Biosecurity and Microbial Forensics. Stillwater. Oklahoma, USA.Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Department of Microbiology. New York, NY, USA.Universitat Polit√®cnica de Valencia - Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Instituto de Biolog√≠a Molecular y Celular de Plantas. Valencia, Spain.Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Department of Microbiology, Medical School. National Reference Centre for Arboviruses and Haemorrhagic Fever viruses. Thessaloniki, Greece.Robert Koch Institute. Genome Competence Center. Berlin, Germany / Cornell University. College of Veterinary Medicine. Baker Institute for Animal Health. Ithaca, NY, USA.Minist√©rio da Sa√ļde. Secretaria de Vigil√Ęncia em Sa√ļde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.National Institute for Communicable Diseases of the National Health Laboratory Service. Center for Emerging Zoonotic and Parasitic Diseases. Sandringham-Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa.University of Georgia. College of Veterinary Medicine. Department of Population Health. Athens, GA, USA.Georgia State University Institute for Biomedical Sciences. Center for Translational Antiviral Research. Atlanta, GA, USA.International AIDS Vaccine Initiative. Vaccine Design and Development Laboratory. Brooklyn, NY, USA.Auckland University of Technology. The School of Science / The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited. Auckland, New Zealand.Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Office of Infectious Diseases. Division of Antivirals. Silver Spring, MD, USA.Instituto Biol√≥gico de S√£o Paulo. S√£o Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade de Bras√≠lia. Departamento de Biologia Celular. Bras√≠lia, DF, Brazil.Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas. Instituto de Biotecnolog√≠a y Biolog√≠a Molecular. Buenos Aires, Argentina.University of Florida. College of Veterinary Medicine. Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunology. Gainesville, Florida, USA.Tufts University Cummings. School of Veterinary Medicine. Department of Infectious Disease & Global Health. North Grafton, MA, USA.Mississippi State University. Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology. Mississippi, Mississippi State, USA.The University of Sydney. School of Medical Sciences. Sydney Institute for Infectious Diseases. Sydney, Australia.University of Maryland. Department of Veterinary Medicine. College Park, MD, USA.National Agriculture and Food Research Organization. Institute for Plant Protection. Tsukuba, Japan.University Medical Center-University Freiburg. Faculty of Medicine. Freiburg, Germany.Western Sydney University. Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment. Sydney, NSW, Australia.Sun Yat-sen University. Shenzhen, PR China.Institute of Forest Biodiversity. Division of Genetics and Tree Improvement. Hyderabad, India.Scientific Institute IRCCS E. Medea. Bioinformatics Unit. Bosisio Parini, Italy.Defence Science and Technology Laboratory. CBR Division. Porton Down, Salisbury, UK.Korea University. College of Medicine. Department of Microbiology. Seoul, Republic of Korea.Queensland University of Technology. Faculty of Health. School of Biomedical Sciences. Brisbane, QLD, Australia.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology. Viral Special Pathogens Branch. Atlanta, GA, USA.Colorado State University. College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Pathology. Fort Collins, CO, USA.Hokkaido University. International Institute for Zoonosis Control. Division of Global Epidemiology. Sapporo, Japan.Shizuoka Professional University of Agriculture. Faculty of Agricultural Production and Management. Shizuoka, Japan.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Atlanta, GA, USA.Universidad San Sebasti√°n. Facultad de Medicina y Ciencia. Fundaci√≥n Ciencia & Vida. Centro Ciencia & Vida. Laboratorio de Virolog√≠a Molecular. Santiago, Chile.Kyoto University. Institute for Life and Medical Sciences. Kyoto, Japan.Institut Pasteur de Guin√©e. Conakry, Guinea.Yangzhou University. Jiangsu Co-innovation Center for Prevention and Control of Important Animal Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses. College of Veterinary Medicine. Yangzhou, PR China.Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Changchun Veterinary Research Institute. Changchun, PR China.Institute for Sustainable Plant Protection, National Research Council of Italy. Torino, Italy.University of Arkansas System. Division of Agriculture. Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology. Fayetteville, AR, USA.University Medical Centre Rotterdam. Erasmus MC. Department of Viroscience. Rotterdam, Netherlands.KU Leuven. Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation. Leuven, Belgium.The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Galveston, TX, USA.Wageningen University. Research, Biointeractions and Plant Health. Wageningen, Netherlands.National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center. Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD, USA.University of Queensland. School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences. St. Lucia, QLD, Australia.Washington State University. Department of Veterinary Microbiology and Pathology. Pullman, WA, USA.North Carolina State University. Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology. Raleigh, NC, USA.Chinese Academy of Sciences. Wuhan Institute of Virology. Key Laboratory of Special Pathogens and Biosafety. Wuhan, PR China.Agricultural University of Athens. School of Agricultural Production, Infrastructure and Environment. Department of Crop Science. Plant Pathology Laboratory. Votanikos, Athens, Greece.Yokohama Plant Protection Station. Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.Zhejiang University. Institute of Insect Sciences. Hangzhou, PR China.Universidade Federal de Vi√ßosa. Dep. de Fitopatologia/BIOAGRO. Vi√ßosa, MG, Brazil.Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Xinjiang Military Command Area. Xinjiang, PR China.Guangxi Academy of Specialty Crops. Guangxi, PR China / Fudan University. School of Life Sciences and Human Phenome Institute. Shanghai, PR China.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. Beijing, PR China.Pharmaq Analytiq. Bergen, Norway.Francis Crick Institute. Worldwide Influenza Centre. London, UK.Navarro, BeatrizIn April 2023, following the annual International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) ratification vote on newly proposed taxa, the phylum Negarnaviricota was amended and emended. The phylum was expanded by one new family, 14 new genera, and 140 new species. Two genera and 538 species were renamed. One species was moved, and four were abolished. This article presents the updated taxonomy of Negarnaviricota as now accepted by the ICTV

    Cytotoxic CD8+ T cells target citrullinated antigens in rheumatoid arthritis

    No full text
    The immune mechanisms underlying synovitis and joint tissue destruction in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remain incompletely defined. Here, the authors demonstrate that ACPA+ RA patients have activated clonally expanded cytotoxic GZMB+ CD8+ T cells in blood and synovium that target and are activated by citrullinated antigens to mediate cell killing

    Annual (2023) taxonomic update of RNA-directed RNA polymerase-encoding negative-sense RNA viruses (realm Riboviria: kingdom Orthornavirae: phylum Negarnaviricota)

    Get PDF
    55 P√°g.In April 2023, following the annual International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) ratification vote on newly proposed taxa, the phylum Negarnaviricota was amended and emended. The phylum was expanded by one new family, 14 new genera, and 140 new species. Two genera and 538 species were renamed. One species was moved, and four were abolished. This article presents the updated taxonomy of Negarnaviricota as now accepted by the ICTV.This work was supported in part through the Laulima Government Solutions, LLC, prime contract with the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infec tious Diseases (NIAID) under Contract No. HHSN272201800013C. J.H.K. performed this work as an employee of Tunnell Government Services (TGS), a subcontractor of Laulima Government Solutions, LLC, under Contract No. HHSN272201800013C. U.J.B. was supported by the Division of Intramural Resarch, NIAID. This work was also funded in part by Contract No. HSHQDC15-C-00064 awarded by DHS S and T for the management and operation of The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Centre, a federally funded research and development centre operated by the Battelle National Biodefense Institute (V.W.); and NIH contract HHSN272201000040I/HHSN27200004/D04 and grant R24AI120942 (N.V., R.B.T.). S.S. acknowl edges support from the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (MAFES), USDA-ARS project 58-6066-9-033 and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hatch Project, under Accession Number 1021494. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Department of the Army, the U.S. Department of Defence, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, including the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S and T), or of the institutions and companies affiliated with the authors. In no event shall any of these entities have any responsibility or liability for any use, misuse, inability to use, or reliance upon the information contained herein. The U.S. departments do not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this publication. The U.S. Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the U.S.Government retains a non-exclusive, paid up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes.Peer reviewe

    Impact of primary kidney disease on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease: secondary analyses of the EMPA-KIDNEY trial

    No full text
    Background: The EMPA-KIDNEY trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic kidney disease mainly through slowing progression. We aimed to assess how effects of empagliflozin might differ by primary kidney disease across its broad population. Methods: EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA). Patients were eligible if their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2, or 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher at screening. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily or matching placebo. Effects on kidney disease progression (defined as a sustained ‚Č•40% eGFR decline from randomisation, end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR below 10 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2, or death from kidney failure) were assessed using prespecified Cox models, and eGFR slope analyses used shared parameter models. Subgroup comparisons were performed by including relevant interaction terms in models. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. Findings: Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and followed up for a median of 2¬∑0 years (IQR 1¬∑5-2¬∑4). Prespecified subgroupings by primary kidney disease included 2057 (31¬∑1%) participants with diabetic kidney disease, 1669 (25¬∑3%) with glomerular disease, 1445 (21¬∑9%) with hypertensive or renovascular disease, and 1438 (21¬∑8%) with other or unknown causes. Kidney disease progression occurred in 384 (11¬∑6%) of 3304 patients in the empagliflozin group and 504 (15¬∑2%) of 3305 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0¬∑71 [95% CI 0¬∑62-0¬∑81]), with no evidence that the relative effect size varied significantly by primary kidney disease (pheterogeneity=0¬∑62). The between-group difference in chronic eGFR slopes (ie, from 2 months to final follow-up) was 1¬∑37 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 per year (95% CI 1¬∑16-1¬∑59), representing a 50% (42-58) reduction in the rate of chronic eGFR decline. This relative effect of empagliflozin on chronic eGFR slope was similar in analyses by different primary kidney diseases, including in explorations by type of glomerular disease and diabetes (p values for heterogeneity all >0¬∑1). Interpretation: In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk of progression, including a wide range of non-diabetic causes of chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin reduced risk of kidney disease progression. Relative effect sizes were broadly similar irrespective of the cause of primary kidney disease, suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors should be part of a standard of care to minimise risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and UK Medical Research Council

    Effects of empagliflozin on progression of chronic kidney disease: a prespecified secondary analysis from the empa-kidney trial

    No full text
    Background: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce progression of chronic kidney disease and the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in a wide range of patients. However, their effects on kidney disease progression in some patients with chronic kidney disease are unclear because few clinical kidney outcomes occurred among such patients in the completed trials. In particular, some guidelines stratify their level of recommendation about who should be treated with SGLT2 inhibitors based on diabetes status and albuminuria. We aimed to assess the effects of empagliflozin on progression of chronic kidney disease both overall and among specific types of participants in the EMPA-KIDNEY trial. Methods: EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA), and included individuals aged 18 years or older with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2, or with an eGFR of 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher. We explored the effects of 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily versus placebo on the annualised rate of change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR slope), a tertiary outcome. We studied the acute slope (from randomisation to 2 months) and chronic slope (from 2 months onwards) separately, using shared parameter models to estimate the latter. Analyses were done in all randomly assigned participants by intention to treat. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. Findings: Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and then followed up for a median of 2¬∑0 years (IQR 1¬∑5-2¬∑4). Prespecified subgroups of eGFR included 2282 (34¬∑5%) participants with an eGFR of less than 30 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2, 2928 (44¬∑3%) with an eGFR of 30 to less than 45 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2, and 1399 (21¬∑2%) with an eGFR 45 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 or higher. Prespecified subgroups of uACR included 1328 (20¬∑1%) with a uACR of less than 30 mg/g, 1864 (28¬∑2%) with a uACR of 30 to 300 mg/g, and 3417 (51¬∑7%) with a uACR of more than 300 mg/g. Overall, allocation to empagliflozin caused an acute 2¬∑12 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 (95% CI 1¬∑83-2¬∑41) reduction in eGFR, equivalent to a 6% (5-6) dip in the first 2 months. After this, it halved the chronic slope from -2¬∑75 to -1¬∑37 mL/min per 1¬∑73 m2 per year (relative difference 50%, 95% CI 42-58). The absolute and relative benefits of empagliflozin on the magnitude of the chronic slope varied significantly depending on diabetes status and baseline levels of eGFR and uACR. In particular, the absolute difference in chronic slopes was lower in patients with lower baseline uACR, but because this group progressed more slowly than those with higher uACR, this translated to a larger relative difference in chronic slopes in this group (86% [36-136] reduction in the chronic slope among those with baseline uACR <30 mg/g compared with a 29% [19-38] reduction for those with baseline uACR ‚Č•2000 mg/g; ptrend<0¬∑0001). Interpretation: Empagliflozin slowed the rate of progression of chronic kidney disease among all types of participant in the EMPA-KIDNEY trial, including those with little albuminuria. Albuminuria alone should not be used to determine whether to treat with an SGLT2 inhibitor. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly