Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 72
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Infect Dis ; 222(8): 1311-1319, 2020 09 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32484879

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: During 2017, a multistate outbreak investigation occurred after the confirmation of Seoul virus (SEOV) infections in people and pet rats. A total of 147 humans and 897 rats were tested. METHODS: In addition to immunoglobulin (Ig)G and IgM serology and traditional reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), novel quantitative RT-PCR primers/probe were developed, and whole genome sequencing was performed. RESULTS: Seventeen people had SEOV IgM, indicating recent infection; 7 reported symptoms and 3 were hospitalized. All patients recovered. Thirty-one facilities in 11 US states had SEOV infection, and among those with ≥10 rats tested, rat IgG prevalence ranged 2%-70% and SEOV RT-PCR positivity ranged 0%-70%. Human laboratory-confirmed cases were significantly associated with rat IgG positivity and RT-PCR positivity (P = .03 and P = .006, respectively). Genomic sequencing identified >99.5% homology between SEOV sequences in this outbreak, and these were >99% identical to SEOV associated with previous pet rat infections in England, the Netherlands, and France. Frequent trade of rats between home-based ratteries contributed to transmission of SEOV between facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Pet rat owners, breeders, and the healthcare and public health community should be aware and take steps to prevent SEOV transmission in pet rats and to humans. Biosecurity measures and diagnostic testing can prevent further infections.


Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças , Febre Hemorrágica com Síndrome Renal/transmissão , Doenças dos Roedores/transmissão , Vírus Seoul/isolamento & purificação , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Animais , Cruzamento , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/veterinária , Surtos de Doenças/veterinária , Genoma Viral/genética , Febre Hemorrágica com Síndrome Renal/diagnóstico , Febre Hemorrágica com Síndrome Renal/epidemiologia , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Imunoglobulina M/sangue , Lactente , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Animais de Estimação/virologia , Filogenia , Prevalência , RNA Viral/genética , Ratos , Doenças dos Roedores/diagnóstico , Doenças dos Roedores/epidemiologia , Vírus Seoul/classificação , Vírus Seoul/genética , Vírus Seoul/imunologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Zoonoses Virais/diagnóstico , Zoonoses Virais/epidemiologia , Zoonoses Virais/transmissão , Adulto Jovem
2.
Am J Transplant ; 20(5): 1285-1295, 2020 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31850658

RESUMO

We have previously shown that pancreatic islets engineered to transiently display a modified form of FasL protein (SA-FasL) on their surface survive indefinitely in allogeneic recipients without a need for chronic immunosuppression. Mechanisms that confer long-term protection to allograft are yet to be elucidated. We herein demonstrated that immune protection evolves in two distinct phases; induction and maintenance. SA-FasL-engineered allogeneic islets survived indefinitely and conferred protection to a second set of donor-matched, but not third-party, unmanipulated islet grafts simultaneously transplanted under the contralateral kidney capsule. Protection at the induction phase involved a reduction in the frequency of proliferating alloreactive T cells in the graft-draining lymph nodes, and required phagocytes and TGF-ß. At the maintenance phase, immune protection evolved into graft site-restricted immune privilege as the destruction of long-surviving SA-FasL-islet grafts by streptozotocin followed by the transplantation of a second set of unmanipulated islet grafts into the same site from the donor, but not third party, resulted in indefinite survival. The induced immune privilege required both CD4+ CD25+ Foxp3+ Treg cells and persistent presence of donor antigens. Engineering cell and tissue surfaces with SA-FasL protein provides a practical, efficient, and safe means of localized immunomodulation with important implications for autoimmunity and transplantation.


Assuntos
Transplante das Ilhotas Pancreáticas , Ilhotas Pancreáticas , Proteína Ligante Fas , Sobrevivência de Enxerto , Privilégio Imunológico , Tolerância Imunológica
3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD011268, 2019 03 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30883669

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This review - one of four reviews on efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD - focuses on second-generation antidepressants (SGAs). OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of SGAs (in comparison with other SGAs, placebo, light therapy, melatonin or agomelatine, psychological therapies or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1950- ), Embase (1974- ), PsycINFO (1967- ) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to 19 June 2018. An earlier search of these databases was conducted via the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMD-CTR) (all years to 11 August 2015). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and international trial registers (to 19 June 2018). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. For adverse events, we planned to include non-randomised studies. Eligible studies compared a SGA versus another SGA, placebo, light therapy, psychological therapy, melatonin, agomelatine or lifestyle changes. We also intended to compare SGAs in combination with any of the comparator interventions versus placebo or the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened abstracts and full-text publications, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. When data were sufficient, we conducted random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses. We assessed statistical heterogeneity by calculating the Chi2 statistic and the Cochran Q. We used the I2 statistic to estimate the magnitude of heterogeneity. We assessed publication bias by using funnel plots.We rated the strength of the evidence using the system developed by the GRADE Working Group. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 3745 citations after de-duplication of search results and excluded 3619 records during title and abstract reviews. We assessed 126 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, of which four publications (on three RCTs) providing data from 1100 people met eligibility criteria for this review. All three RCTs had methodological limitations due to high attrition rates.Overall, moderate-quality evidence indicates that bupropion XL is an efficacious intervention for prevention of recurrence of depressive episodes in people with a history of SAD (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.72; 3 RCTs, 1100 participants). However, bupropion XL leads to greater risk of headaches (moderate-quality evidence), insomnia and nausea (both low-quality evidence) when compared with placebo. Numbers needed to treat for additional beneficial outcomes (NNTBs) vary by baseline risks. For a population with a yearly recurrence rate of 30%, the NNTB is 8 (95% CI 6 to 12). For populations with yearly recurrence rates of 50% and 60%, NNTBs are 5 (95% CI 4 to 7) and 4 (95% CI 3 to 6), respectively.We could find no studies on other SGAs and no studies comparing SGAs with other interventions of interest, such as light therapy, psychological therapies, melatonin or agomelatine. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence indicates that bupropion XL is an effective intervention for prevention of recurrence of SAD. Nevertheless, even in a high-risk population, three out of four people will not benefit from preventive treatment with bupropion XL and will be at risk for harm. Clinicians need to discuss with patients advantages and disadvantages of preventive SGA treatment, and might want to consider offering other potentially efficacious interventions, which might confer a lower risk of adverse events. Given the lack of comparative evidence, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences.Future researchers need to assess the effectiveness and risk of harms of SGAs other than bupropion for prevention of SAD. Investigators also need to compare benefits and harms of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Bupropiona/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/efeitos adversos , Bupropiona/efeitos adversos , Diarreia/induzido quimicamente , Cefaleia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Incidência , Náusea/induzido quimicamente , Números Necessários para Tratar , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recidiva , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/epidemiologia , Distúrbios do Início e da Manutenção do Sono/induzido quimicamente
4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD011269, 2019 03 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30883670

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This review - one of four reviews on efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD - focuses on light therapy as a preventive intervention. Light therapy is a non-pharmacological treatment that exposes people to artificial light. Mode of delivery and form of light vary. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of light therapy (in comparison with no treatment, other types of light therapy, second-generation antidepressants, melatonin, agomelatine, psychological therapies, lifestyle interventions and negative ion generators) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1950- ), Embase (1974- ), PsycINFO (1967- ) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to 19 June 2018. An earlier search of these databases was conducted via the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMD-CTR) (all years to 11 August 2015). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and international trial registers (to 19 June 2018). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. For adverse events, we also intended to include non-randomised studies. We intended to include studies that compared any type of light therapy (e.g. bright white light, administered by visors or light boxes, infrared light, dawn stimulation) versus no treatment/placebo, second-generation antidepressants, psychological therapies, melatonin, agomelatine, lifestyle changes, negative ion generators or another of the aforementioned light therapies. We also planned to include studies that looked at light therapy in combination with any comparator intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications, independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 3745 citations after de-duplication of search results. We excluded 3619 records during title and abstract review. We assessed 126 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, but only one study providing data from 46 people met our eligibility criteria. The included RCT had methodological limitations. We rated it as having high risk of performance and detection bias because of lack of blinding, and as having high risk of attrition bias because study authors did not report reasons for dropouts and did not integrate data from dropouts into the analysis.The included RCT compared preventive use of bright white light (2500 lux via visors), infrared light (0.18 lux via visors) and no light treatment. Overall, white light and infrared light therapy reduced the incidence of SAD numerically compared with no light therapy. In all, 43% (6/14) of participants in the bright light group developed SAD, as well as 33% (5/15) in the infrared light group and 67% (6/9) in the non-treatment group. Bright light therapy reduced the risk of SAD incidence by 36%; however, the 95% confidence interval (CI) was very broad and included both possible effect sizes in favour of bright light therapy and those in favour of no light therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.38; 23 participants, very low-quality evidence). Infrared light reduced the risk of SAD by 50% compared with no light therapy, but the CI was also too broad to allow precise estimations of effect size (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.17; 24 participants, very low-quality evidence). Comparison of both forms of preventive light therapy versus each other yielded similar rates of incidence of depressive episodes in both groups (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.28; 29 participants, very low-quality evidence). Reasons for downgrading evidence quality included high risk of bias of the included study, imprecision and other limitations, such as self-rating of outcomes, lack of checking of compliance throughout the study duration and insufficient reporting of participant characteristics.Investigators provided no information on adverse events. We could find no studies that compared light therapy versus other interventions of interest such as second-generation antidepressants, psychological therapies, melatonin or agomelatine. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on light therapy as preventive treatment for people with a history of SAD is limited. Methodological limitations and the small sample size of the only available study have precluded review author conclusions on effects of light therapy for SAD. Given that comparative evidence for light therapy versus other preventive options is limited, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences.


Assuntos
Fototerapia , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino
5.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD011270, 2019 05 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31124141

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This is one of four reviews on the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD; we focus on psychological therapies as preventive interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of psychological therapies (in comparison with no treatment, other types of psychological therapy, second-generation antidepressants, light therapy, melatonin or agomelatine or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving person-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1950- ), Embase (1974- ), PsycINFO (1967- ) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to 19 June 2018. An earlier search of these databases was conducted via the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMD-CTR) (all years to 11 August 2015). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and international trial registers (to 19 June 2018). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: To examine efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. To examine adverse events, we intended to include non-randomised studies. We planned to include studies that compared psychological therapy versus no treatment, or any other type of psychological therapy, light therapy, second-generation antidepressants, melatonin, agomelatine or lifestyle changes. We also planned to compare psychological therapy in combination with any of the comparator interventions listed above versus no treatment or the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications against the inclusion criteria, independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and graded the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 3745 citations through electronic searches and reviews of reference lists after deduplication of search results. We excluded 3619 records during title and abstract review and assessed 126 articles at full-text review for eligibility. We included one controlled study enrolling 46 participants. We rated this RCT at high risk for performance and detection bias due to a lack of blinding.The included RCT compared preventive use of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) with treatment as usual (TAU) in participants with a history of SAD. MBCT was administered in spring in eight weekly individual 45- to 60-minute sessions. In the TAU group participants did not receive any preventive treatment but were invited to start light therapy as first depressive symptoms occurred. Both groups were assessed weekly for occurrence of a new depressive episode measured with the Inventory of Depressive Syptomatology-Self-Report (IDS-SR, range 0-90) from September 2011 to mid-April 2012. The incidence of a new depressive episode in the upcoming winter was similar in both groups. In the MBCT group 65% of 23 participants developed depression (IDS-SR ≥ 20), compared to 74% of 23 people in the TAU group (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.30; 46 participants; very low quality-evidence).For participants with depressive episodes, severity of depression was comparable between groups. Participants in the MBCT group had a mean score of 26.5 (SD 7.0) on the IDS-SR, and TAU participants a mean score of 25.3 (SD 6.3) (mean difference (MD) 1.20, 95% CI -3.44 to 5.84; 32 participants; very low quality-evidence).The overall discontinuation rate was similar too, with 17% discontinuing in the MBCT group and 13% in the TAU group (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.34 to 5.30; 46 participants; very low quality-evidence).Reasons for downgrading the quality of evidence included high risk of bias of the included study and imprecision.Investigators provided no information on adverse events. We could not find any studies that compared psychological therapy with other interventions of interest such as second-generation antidepressants, light therapy, melatonin or agomelatine. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on psychological therapies to prevent the onset of a new depressive episode in people with a history of SAD is inconclusive. We identified only one study including 46 participants focusing on one type of psychological therapy. Methodological limitations and the small sample size preclude us from drawing a conclusion on benefits and harms of MBCT as a preventive intervention for SAD. Given that there is no comparative evidence for psychological therapy versus other preventive options, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences and other preventive interventions that are supported by evidence.


Assuntos
Transtorno Depressivo Maior/terapia , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Antidepressivos/uso terapêutico , Terapia Cognitivo-Comportamental , Humanos , Melatonina/uso terapêutico , Fototerapia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/terapia
6.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD011271, 2019 06 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31206585

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly starts in autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD depends on latitude and ranges from 1.5% to 9%. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention in people who have a history of SAD. This is one of four reviews on the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD; we focus on agomelatine and melatonin as preventive interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of agomelatine and melatonin (in comparison with each other, placebo, second-generation antidepressants, light therapy, psychological therapy or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving person-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1950- ), Embase (1974- ), PsycINFO (1967- ) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to 19 June 2018. An earlier search of these databases was conducted via the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMD-CTR) (all years to 11 August 2015). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and international trial registers (to 19 June 2018). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: To examine efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. For adverse events, we intended also to include non-randomised studies. We planned to include studies that compared agomelatine versus melatonin, or agomelatine or melatonin versus placebo, any second-generation antidepressant, light therapy, psychological therapies or lifestyle changes. We also intended to compare melatonin or agomelatine in combination with any of the comparator interventions mentioned above versus the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications, abstracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies independently. We intended to pool data in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model, but included only one study. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 3745 citations through electronic searches and reviews of reference lists after deduplication of search results. We excluded 3619 records during title and abstract review and assessed 126 full-text papers for inclusion in the review. Only one study, providing data of 225 participants, met our eligibility criteria and compared agomelatine (25 mg/day) with placebo. We rated it as having high risk of attrition bias because nearly half of the participants left the study before completion. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low for all outcomes, because of high risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.The main analysis based on data of 199 participants rendered an indeterminate result with wide confidence intervals (CIs) that may encompass both a relevant reduction as well as a relevant increase of SAD incidence by agomelatine (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.34; 199 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Also the severity of SAD may be similar in both groups at the end of the study with a mean SIGH-SAD (Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorders) score of 8.3 (standard deviation (SD) 9.4) in the agomelatine group and 10.1 (SD 10.6) in the placebo group (mean difference (MD) -1.80, 95% CI -4.58 to 0.98; 199 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events may be similar in both groups. In the agomelatine group, 64 out of 112 participants experienced at least one adverse event, while 61 out of 113 did in the placebo group (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.34; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Three out of 112 patients experienced serious adverse events in the agomelatine group, compared to 4 out of 113 in the placebo group (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.30; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence).No data on quality of life or interpersonal functioning were reported. We did not identify any studies on melatonin. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the uncertain evidence on agomelatine and the absence of studies on melatonin, no conclusion about efficacy and safety of agomelatine and melatonin for prevention of SAD can currently be drawn. The decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should consider patient preferences and reflect on the evidence base of all available treatment options.


Assuntos
Acetamidas/uso terapêutico , Antidepressivos/uso terapêutico , Melatonina/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Humanos , Melatonina/agonistas , Placebos/uso terapêutico
7.
FASEB J ; 30(3): 1234-46, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26601824

RESUMO

HIV invades the brain early after infection; however, its interactions with the cells of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) remain poorly understood. Our goal was to evaluate the role of occludin, one of the tight junction proteins that regulate BBB functions in HIV infection of BBB pericytes. We provide evidence that occludin levels largely control the metabolic responses of human pericytes to HIV. Occludin in BBB pericytes decreased by 10% during the first 48 h after HIV infection, correlating with increased nuclear translocation of the gene repressor C-terminal-binding protein (CtBP)-1 and NFκB-p65 activation. These changes were associated with decreased expression and activation of the class III histone deacetylase sirtuin (SIRT)-1. Occludin levels recovered 96 h after infection, restoring SIRT-1 and reducing HIV transcription to 20% of its highest values. We characterized occludin biochemically as a novel NADH oxidase that controls the expression and activation of SIRT-1. The inverse correlation between occludin and HIV transcription was then replicated in human primary macrophages and differentiated monocytic U937 cells, in which occludin silencing resulted in 75 and 250% increased viral transcription, respectively. Our work shows that occludin has previously unsuspected metabolic properties and is a target of HIV infection, opening the possibility of designing novel pharmacological approaches to control HIV transcription.


Assuntos
Barreira Hematoencefálica/virologia , Infecções por HIV/virologia , HIV/genética , Ocludina/metabolismo , Oxirredutases do Álcool/metabolismo , Barreira Hematoencefálica/metabolismo , Encéfalo/metabolismo , Encéfalo/virologia , Células Cultivadas , Proteínas de Ligação a DNA/metabolismo , HIV/metabolismo , Infecções por HIV/metabolismo , Humanos , NF-kappa B/metabolismo , Pericitos/metabolismo , Pericitos/virologia , Sirtuína 1/metabolismo , Junções Íntimas/metabolismo , Junções Íntimas/virologia , Transcrição Gênica/genética
8.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 17(1): 169, 2017 Dec 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29233133

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Summary of findings tables in systematic reviews are highly informative but require epidemiological training to be interpreted correctly. The usage of fishbone diagrams as graphical displays could offer researchers an effective approach to simplify content for readers with limited epidemiological training. In this paper we demonstrate how fishbone diagrams can be applied to systematic reviews and present the results of an initial user testing. METHODS: Findings from two systematic reviews were graphically depicted in the form of the fishbone diagram. To test the utility of fishbone diagrams compared with summary of findings tables, we developed and pilot-tested an online survey using Qualtrics. Respondents were randomized to the fishbone diagram or a summary of findings table presenting the same body of evidence. They answered questions in both open-ended and closed-answer formats; all responses were anonymous. Measures of interest focused on first and second impressions, the ability to find and interpret critical information, as well as user experience with both displays. We asked respondents about the perceived utility of fishbone diagrams compared to summary of findings tables. We analyzed quantitative data by conducting t-tests and comparing descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Based on real world systematic reviews, we provide two different fishbone diagrams to show how they might be used to display complex information in a clear and succinct manner. User testing on 77 students with basic epidemiological training revealed that participants preferred summary of findings tables over fishbone diagrams. Significantly more participants liked the summary of findings table than the fishbone diagram (71.8% vs. 44.8%; p < .01); significantly more participants found the fishbone diagram confusing (63.2% vs. 35.9%, p < .05) or indicated that it was difficult to find information (65.8% vs. 45%; p < .01). However, more than half of the participants in both groups were unable to find critical information and answer three respective questions correctly (52.6% in the fishbone group; 51.3% in the summary of findings group). CONCLUSIONS: Fishbone diagrams are compact visualizations that, theoretically, may prove useful for summarizing the findings of systematic reviews. Initial user testing, however, did not support the utility of such graphical displays.


Assuntos
Literatura de Revisão como Assunto , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos
9.
Ann Intern Med ; 164(5): 331-41, 2016 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26857743

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Primary care patients and clinicians may prefer options other than second-generation antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). The comparative benefits and harms of antidepressants and alternative treatments are unclear. PURPOSE: To compare the benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants and psychological, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), and exercise treatments as first- and second-step interventions for adults with acute MDD. DATA SOURCES: English-, German-, and Italian-language studies from multiple electronic databases (January 1990 to September 2015); trial registries and gray-literature databases were used to identify unpublished research. STUDY SELECTION: Two investigators independently selected comparative randomized trials of at least 6 weeks' duration on health outcomes of adult outpatients; nonrandomized studies were eligible for harms. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewers abstracted data on study design, participants, interventions, and outcomes; rated the risk of bias; and graded the strength of evidence. A senior reviewer confirmed data and ratings. DATA SYNTHESIS: 45 trials met inclusion criteria. On the basis of moderate-strength evidence, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and antidepressants led to similar response rates (relative risk [RR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.07]) and remission rates (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.73 to 1.32]). In trials, antidepressants had higher risks for adverse events than most other treatment options; no information from nonrandomized studies was available. The evidence was too limited to make firm conclusions about differences in the benefits and harms of antidepressants compared with other treatment options as first-step therapies for acute MDD. For second-step therapies, different switching and augmentation strategies provided similar symptom relief. LIMITATION: High dropout rates, dosing inequalities, small sample sizes, and poor assessment of adverse events limit confidence in the evidence. CONCLUSION: Given their similar efficacy, CBT and antidepressants are both viable choices for initial treatment of MDD. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Terapia Cognitivo-Comportamental , Terapias Complementares , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/terapia , Terapia por Exercício , Adulto , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/efeitos adversos , Terapias Complementares/efeitos adversos , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/tratamento farmacológico , Terapia por Exercício/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Indução de Remissão
10.
J Infect Dis ; 214(suppl 3): S258-S262, 2016 10 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27587631

RESUMO

During the Ebola virus outbreak of 2013-2016, the Viral Special Pathogens Branch field laboratory in Sierra Leone tested approximately 26 000 specimens between August 2014 and October 2015. Analysis of the B2M endogenous control Ct values showed its utility in monitoring specimen quality, comparing results with different specimen types, and interpretation of results. For live patients, blood is the most sensitive specimen type and oral swabs have little diagnostic utility. However, swabs are highly sensitive for diagnostic testing of corpses.


Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças , Ebolavirus/isolamento & purificação , Doença pelo Vírus Ebola/diagnóstico , RNA Viral/análise , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase Via Transcriptase Reversa/métodos , Serviços de Laboratório Clínico , Ebolavirus/genética , Doença pelo Vírus Ebola/epidemiologia , Doença pelo Vírus Ebola/virologia , Humanos , Laboratórios , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real/métodos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Serra Leoa/epidemiologia
11.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (11): CD011268, 2015 Nov 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26558418

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This review - one of four reviews on efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD - focuses on second-generation antidepressants (SGAs). OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of second-generation antidepressants (in comparison with other SGAs, placebo, light therapy, melatonin or agomelatine, psychological therapies or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: A search of the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neuorosis Review Group (CCDANCTR) included all years to 11 August 2015. The CCDANCTR contains reports of randomised controlled trials derived from EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Knowledge, The Cochrane Library and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (to 26 May 2014). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. For adverse events, we planned to include non-randomised studies. Eligible studies compared an SGA versus another SGA, placebo, light therapy, psychological therapy, melatonin, agomelatine or lifestyle changes. We also intended to compare SGAs in combination with any of the comparator interventions versus the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications and assigned risk of bias ratings based on the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We resolved disagreements by consensus or by consultation with a third party. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. When data were sufficient, we conducted random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses. We assessed statistical heterogeneity by calculating the Chi(2) statistic and the Cochran Q. We used the I(2) statistic to estimate the magnitude of heterogeneity and examined potential sources of heterogeneity using sensitivity analysis or analysis of subgroups. We assessed publication bias by using funnel plots. However, given the small number of component studies in our meta-analyses, these tests have low sensitivity to detect publication bias. We rated the strength of the evidence using the system developed by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 2986 citations after de-duplication of search results and excluded 2895 records during title and abstract reviews. We assessed 91 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, of which four publications (on three RCTs) providing data from 1100 people met eligibility criteria for this review. All three RCTs had methodological limitations due to high attrition rates.Overall moderate-quality evidence indicates that bupropion XL is an efficacious intervention for prevention of recurrence of depressive episodes in patients with a history of SAD (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.72; three RCTs, 1100 participants). However, bupropion XL leads to greater risk of headaches (moderate-quality evidence), insomnia and nausea (both low-quality evidence) when compared with placebo. Numbers needed to treat for additional beneficial outcomes (NNTBs) vary by baseline risks. For a population with a yearly recurrence rate of 30%, the NNTB is 8 (95% CI 6 to 12). For populations with yearly recurrence rates of 40% and 50%, NNTBs are 6 (95% CI 5 to 9) and 5 (95% CI 4 to 7), respectively.We could find no studies on other SGAs and no studies comparing SGAs with other interventions of interest such as light therapy, psychological therapies, melatonin or agomelatine. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence indicates that bupropion XL is an effective intervention for prevention of recurrence of SAD. Nevertheless, even in a high-risk population, four of five patients will not benefit from preventive treatment with bupropion XL and will be at risk for harm. Clinicians need to discuss with patients advantages and disadvantages of preventive SGA treatment and might want to consider offering other potentially efficacious interventions, which might confer lower risk of adverse events. Given the lack of comparative evidence, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences.Future researchers need to assess the effectiveness and risk of harms of SGAs other than bupropion for prevention of SAD. Investigators also need to compare benefits and harms of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Bupropiona/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/epidemiologia
12.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (11): CD011269, 2015 Nov 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26558494

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This review - one of four reviews on efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD - focuses on light therapy as a preventive intervention. Light therapy is a non-pharmacological treatment that exposes people to artificial light. Mode of delivery (e.g. visors, light boxes) and form of light (e.g. bright white light) vary. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of light therapy (in comparison with no treatment, other types of light therapy, second-generation antidepressants, melatonin, agomelatine, psychological therapies, lifestyle interventions and negative ion generators) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: A search of the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neuorosis Review Group (CCDANCTR) included all years to 11 August 2015. The CCDANCTR contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials derived from EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails (CENTRAL). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge, The Cochrane Library and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) (to 26 May 2014). We also conducted a grey literature search and handsearched the reference lists of all included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: For efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. For adverse events, we also intended to include non-randomised studies. We intended to include studies that compared any type of light therapy (e.g. bright white light, administered by visors or light boxes, infrared light, dawn stimulation) versus no treatment/placebo, second-generation antidepressants (SGAs), psychological therapies, melatonin, agomelatine, lifestyle changes, negative ion generators or another of the aforementioned light therapies. We also planned to include studies that looked at light therapy in combination with any comparator intervention and compared this with the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications against the inclusion criteria. Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 2986 citations after de-duplication of search results. We excluded 2895 records during title and abstract review. We assessed 91 full-text papers for inclusion in the review, but only one study providing data from 46 people met our eligibility criteria. The included randomised controlled trial (RCT) had methodological limitations. We rated it as having high risk of performance and detection bias because of lack of blinding, and as having high risk of attrition bias because study authors did not report reasons for dropouts and did not integrate data from dropouts into the analysis.The included RCT compared preventive use of bright white light (2500 lux via visors), infrared light (0.18 lux via visors) and no light treatment. Overall, both forms of preventive light therapy reduced the incidence of SAD numerically compared with no light therapy. In all, 43% (6/14) of participants in the bright light group developed SAD, as well as 33% (5/15) in the infrared light group and 67% (6/9) in the non-treatment group. Bright light therapy reduced the risk of SAD incidence by 36%; however, the 95% confidence interval (CI) was very broad and included both possible effect sizes in favour of bright light therapy and those in favour of no light therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.38). Infrared light reduced the risk of SAD by 50% compared with no light therapy, but in this case also the CI was too broad to allow precise estimations of effect size (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.17). Comparison of both forms of preventive light therapy versus each other yielded similar rates of incidence of depressive episodes in both groups (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.28). The quality of evidence for all outcomes was very low. Reasons for downgrading evidence quality included high risk of bias of the included study, imprecision and other limitations, such as self rating of outcomes, lack of checking of compliance throughout the study duration and insufficient reporting of participant characteristics.Investigators provided no information on adverse events. We could find no studies that compared light therapy versus other interventions of interest such as SGA, psychological therapies, melatonin or agomelatine. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on light therapy as preventive treatment for patients with a history of SAD is limited. Methodological limitations and the small sample size of the only available study have precluded review author conclusions on effects of light therapy for SAD. Given that comparative evidence for light therapy versus other preventive options is limited, the decision for or against initiating preventive treatment of SAD and the treatment selected should be strongly based on patient preferences.


Assuntos
Fototerapia/métodos , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Humanos , Incidência , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/epidemiologia
13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (11): CD011270, 2015 Nov 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26560172

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This is one of four reviews on the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD; we focus on psychological therapies as preventive interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of psychological therapies (in comparison with no treatment, other types of psychological therapy, second-generation antidepressants (SGAs), light therapy, melatonin or agomelatine or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted a search of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 11 August 2015. The CCDANCTR contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials from EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge, The Cochrane Library and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) (to 26 May 2014). We conducted a grey literature search (e.g. in clinical trial registries) and handsearched the reference lists of all included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: To examine efficacy, we planned to include randomised controlled trials on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. To examine adverse events, we intended to include non-randomised studies. We planned to include studies that compared psychological therapy versus any other type of psychological therapy, placebo, light therapy, SGAs, melatonin, agomelatine or lifestyle changes. We also intended to compare psychological therapy in combination with any of the comparator interventions listed above versus the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications against the inclusion criteria. Two review authors planned to independently extract data and assess risk of bias. We planned to pool data for meta-analysis when participant groups were similar and when studies assessed the same treatments versus the same comparator and provided similar definitions of outcome measures over a similar duration of treatment; however, we included no studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 2986 citations through electronic searches and reviews of reference lists after de-duplication of search results. We excluded 2895 records during title and abstract review and assessed 91 articles at full-text review for eligibility. We found no controlled studies on use of psychological therapy to prevent SAD and improve patient-centred outcomes in adults with a history of SAD. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Presently, there is no methodologically sound evidence available to indicate whether psychological therapy is or is not an effective intervention for prevention of SAD and improvement of patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. Randomised controlled trials are needed to compare different types of psychological therapies and to compare psychological therapies versus placebo, light therapy, SGAs, melatonin, agomelatine or lifestyle changes for prevention of new depressive episodes in patients with a history of winter-type SAD.


Assuntos
Psicoterapia/métodos , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Humanos
14.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (11): CD011271, 2015 Nov 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26560173

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a seasonal pattern of recurrent major depressive episodes that most commonly occurs during autumn or winter and remits in spring. The prevalence of SAD in the United States ranges from 1.5% to 9%, depending on latitude. The predictable seasonal aspect of SAD provides a promising opportunity for prevention. This is one of four reviews on the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent SAD; we focus on agomelatine and melatonin as preventive interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of agomelatine and melatonin (in comparison with each other, placebo, second-generation antidepressants, light therapy, psychological therapy or lifestyle interventions) in preventing SAD and improving patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted a search of the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group (CCDANCTR) to 11 August 2015. The CCDANCTR contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials from EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Furthermore, we searched the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge, The Cochrane Library and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) (to 26 May 2014). We conducted a grey literature search (e.g. in clinical trial registries) and handsearched the reference lists of all included studies and pertinent review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: To examine efficacy, we planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with a history of winter-type SAD who were free of symptoms at the beginning of the study. To examine adverse events, we intended to include non-randomised studies. We planned to include studies that compared agomelatine versus melatonin, or agomelatine or melatonin versus placebo, any second-generation antidepressant (SGA), light therapy, psychological therapies or lifestyle changes. We also intended to compare melatonin or agomelatine in combination with any of the comparator interventions listed above versus the same comparator intervention as monotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications against the inclusion criteria. Two review authors planned to independently extract data and assess risk of bias of included studies. We planned to pool data for meta-analysis when participant groups were similar and when studies assessed the same treatments by using the same comparator and presented similar definitions of outcome measures over a similar duration of treatment; however, we identified no studies for inclusion. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 2986 citations through electronic searches and reviews of reference lists after de-duplication of search results. We excluded 2895 records during title and abstract review and assessed 91 articles at full-text level for eligibility. We identified no controlled studies on use of melatonin and agomelatine to prevent SAD and to improve patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No available methodologically sound evidence indicates that melatonin or agomelatine is or is not an effective intervention for prevention of SAD and improvement of patient-centred outcomes among adults with a history of SAD. Lack of evidence clearly shows the need for well-conducted, controlled studies on this topic. A well-conducted RCT of melatonin or agomelatine for prevention of SAD would assess the comparative benefits and risks of these interventions against others currently used to treat the disorder.


Assuntos
Acetamidas/uso terapêutico , Melatonina/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Afetivo Sazonal/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Humanos , Melatonina/agonistas
15.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 11(1): ofae001, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38250201

RESUMO

Background: We report clinical, epidemiological, and laboratory features of a large diarrhea outbreak caused by a novel Cryptosporidium hominis subtype during British military training in Kenya between February and April 2022. Methods: Data were collated from diarrhea cases, and fecal samples were analyzed on site using the multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) BioFire FilmArray. Water was tested using Colilert kits (IDEXX, UK). DNA was extracted from feces for molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium A135, Lib13, ssu rRNA, and gp60 genes. Results: One hundred seventy-two of 1200 (14.3%) personnel at risk developed diarrhea over 69 days. One hundred six primary fecal samples were tested, and 63/106 (59.4%; 95% CI, 0.49%-0.69%) were positive for Cryptosporidium spp. Thirty-eight had Cryptosporidium spp. alone, and 25 had Cryptosporidium spp. with ≥1 other pathogen. A further 27/106 (25.5%; 95% CI, 0.18%-0.35%) had non-Cryptosporidium pathogens only, and 16/106 (15.1%; 95% CI, 0.09%-0.23%) were negative. C. hominis was detected in 58/63 (92.1%) Cryptosporidium spp.-positive primary samples, but the others were not genotypable. Twenty-seven C. hominis specimens were subtypable; 1 was gp60 subtype IeA11G3T3, and 26 were an unusual subtype, ImA13G1 (GenBank accession OP699729), supporting epidemiological evidence suggesting a point source outbreak from contaminated swimming water. Diarrhea persisted for a mean (SD) of 7.6 (4.6) days in Cryptosporidium spp. cases compared with 2.3 (0.9) days in non-Cryptosporidium cases (P = .001). Conclusions: Real-time multiplex PCR fecal testing was vital in managing this large cryptosporidiosis outbreak. The etiology of a rare C. hominis gp60 subtype emphasizes the need for more genotypic surveillance to identify widening host and geographic ranges of novel C. hominis subtypes.

16.
J Immunol ; 187(11): 5901-9, 2011 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22068235

RESUMO

Allogeneic islet transplantation is an important therapeutic approach for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Clinical application of this approach, however, is severely curtailed by allograft rejection primarily initiated by pathogenic effector T cells regardless of chronic use of immunosuppression. Given the role of Fas-mediated signaling in regulating effector T cell responses, we tested if pancreatic islets can be engineered ex vivo to display on their surface an apoptotic form of Fas ligand protein chimeric with streptavidin (SA-FasL) and whether such engineered islets induce tolerance in allogeneic hosts. Islets were modified with biotin following efficient engineering with SA-FasL protein that persisted on the surface of islets for >1 wk in vitro. SA-FasL-engineered islet grafts established euglycemia in chemically diabetic syngeneic mice indefinitely, demonstrating functionality and lack of acute toxicity. Most importantly, the transplantation of SA-FasL-engineered BALB/c islet grafts in conjunction with a short course of rapamycin treatment resulted in robust localized tolerance in 100% of C57BL/6 recipients. Tolerance was initiated and maintained by CD4(+)CD25(+)Foxp3(+) regulatory T (Treg) cells, as their depletion early during tolerance induction or late after established tolerance resulted in prompt graft rejection. Furthermore, Treg cells sorted from graft-draining lymph nodes, but not spleen, of long-term graft recipients prevented the rejection of unmodified allogeneic islets in an adoptive transfer model, further confirming the Treg role in established tolerance. Engineering islets ex vivo in a rapid and efficient manner to display on their surface immunomodulatory proteins represents a novel, safe, and clinically applicable approach with important implications for the treatment of type 1 diabetes.


Assuntos
Proteína Ligante Fas/imunologia , Tolerância Imunológica/imunologia , Transplante das Ilhotas Pancreáticas/imunologia , Ilhotas Pancreáticas/imunologia , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusão/imunologia , Linfócitos T Reguladores/imunologia , Transferência Adotiva , Animais , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/imunologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/cirurgia , Rejeição de Enxerto/imunologia , Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Imuno-Histoquímica , Indicadores e Reagentes , Transplante das Ilhotas Pancreáticas/métodos , Camundongos , Camundongos Endogâmicos BALB C , Camundongos Endogâmicos C57BL , Camundongos Transgênicos , Estreptavidina/imunologia , Transplante Homólogo
17.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 19(1): 2165382, 2023 12 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36715008

RESUMO

In the United States (US), meningococcal serogroup B (MenB) vaccination has been recommended for 16-23-year-olds (preferably 16-18 years) based on shared clinical decision-making since 2015. MenB vaccine coverage (≥1 dose) by age 17 years has been reported, but initiation at older ages and by insurance type is unknown. In this retrospective cohort study, MarketScan claims data were analyzed to assess MenB vaccine series initiation (i.e. receipt of a first dose) during 2017-2020 among US commercially insured and Medicaid-covered individuals aged 16-18 and 19-23 years. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to estimate series initiation at various times from index (latest of 1/1/2017 or 16th/19th birthday, depending on the cohort). Multivariable analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with series initiation. Among 1,450,354 Commercial and 1,140,977 Medicaid 16-18-year-olds, MenB vaccine series initiation rates within 3 years of each person's first eligibility were estimated to be 33% and 20%, respectively; among 1,857,628 Commercial and 747,483 Medicaid 19-23-year-olds, 3% and 1%, respectively. Factors identified to be significantly associated with increased likelihood of initiating a MenB vaccine series included co-administration of meningococcal serogroups ACWY (MenACWY) vaccine, younger age, female sex, nonwhite race (Medicaid only), New England or Middle Atlantic location (Commercial only), urban residence, and previous influenza vaccination. MenB vaccine series initiation among the studied US adolescents and young adults was low. There is a need for continued efforts to better understand barriers to the uptake of vaccines that are recommended based on shared clinical decision-making.


Assuntos
Infecções Meningocócicas , Vacinas Meningocócicas , Neisseria meningitidis Sorogrupo B , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Feminino , Sorogrupo , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Infecções Meningocócicas/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Vacinação , Análise de Dados
18.
Depress Anxiety ; 29(6): 495-505, 2012 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22553134

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often suffer from accompanying symptoms that influence the choice of pharmacotherapy with second-generation antidepressants (SGAs). We conducted a systematic review to determine the comparative effectiveness of citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, venlafaxine, bupropion, mirtazapine, nefazodone, and trazodone, for accompanying anxiety, insomnia, and pain in patients with MDD. METHODS: We conducted searches in multiple databases including MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and PsycINFO, from 1980 through August 2011 and reviewed reference lists of pertinent articles. We dually reviewed abstracts, full-text articles, and abstracted data. We included randomized, head-to-head trials of SGAs of at least 6 weeks' duration. We grouped SGAs into three classes for the analysis: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and others. We graded the strength of the evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We located 19 head-to-head trials in total: 11 on anxiety, six on insomnia, and four on pain. For the majority of comparisons, the strength of the evidence was moderate or low: evidence is weakened by inconsistency and imprecision. For treating anxiety, insomnia, and pain moderate evidence suggests that the SSRIs do not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence guiding the selection of an SGA based on accompanying symptoms of depression is limited. Very few trials were designed and adequately powered to answer questions about accompanying symptoms; analyses were generally of subgroups in larger MDD trials.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Transtornos de Ansiedade/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/tratamento farmacológico , Distúrbios do Início e da Manutenção do Sono/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos de Ansiedade/complicações , Transtornos de Ansiedade/psicologia , Dor Crônica/complicações , Dor Crônica/psicologia , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/complicações , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/psicologia , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Distúrbios do Início e da Manutenção do Sono/complicações , Distúrbios do Início e da Manutenção do Sono/psicologia , Resultado do Tratamento
19.
Ann Intern Med ; 155(11): 772-85, 2011 Dec 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22147715

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Second-generation antidepressants dominate the management of major depressive disorder (MDD), but evidence on the comparative benefits and harms of these agents is contradictory. PURPOSE: To compare the benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants for treating MDD in adults. DATA SOURCES: English-language studies from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from 1980 to August 2011 and reference lists of pertinent review articles and gray literature. STUDY SELECTION: 2 independent reviewers identified randomized trials of at least 6 weeks' duration to evaluate efficacy and observational studies with at least 1000 participants to assess harm. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewers abstracted data about study design and conduct, participants, and interventions and outcomes and rated study quality. A senior reviewer checked and confirmed extracted data and quality ratings. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses and mixed-treatment comparisons of response to treatment and weighted mean differences were conducted on specific scales to rate depression. On the basis of 234 studies, no clinically relevant differences in efficacy or effectiveness were detected for the treatment of acute, continuation, and maintenance phases of MDD. No differences in efficacy were seen in patients with accompanying symptoms or in subgroups based on age, sex, ethnicity, or comorbid conditions. Individual drugs differed in onset of action, adverse events, and some measures of health-related quality of life. LIMITATIONS: Most trials were conducted in highly selected populations. Publication bias might affect the estimates of some comparisons. Mixed-treatment comparisons cannot conclusively exclude differences in efficacy. Evidence within subgroups was limited. CONCLUSION: Current evidence does not warrant recommending a particular second-generation antidepressant on the basis of differences in efficacy. Differences in onset of action and adverse events may be considered when choosing a medication. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/efeitos adversos , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/tratamento farmacológico , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/administração & dosagem , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade , Preparações de Ação Retardada , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/complicações , Humanos , Recidiva , Indução de Remissão , Disfunções Sexuais Fisiológicas/induzido quimicamente , Ideação Suicida , Resultado do Tratamento
20.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 41(4): e158-e165, 2022 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35086118

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the United States, meningococcal serogroup B (MenB) vaccination is recommended for 16-23-year-olds based on shared clinical decision-making. We estimated series completion among individuals initiating MenB vaccination for the 2 available vaccines: MenB 4-component (MenB-4C, doses at 0 and ≥1 month) and MenB factor H binding protein (MenB-FHbp, doses at 0 and 6 months). METHODS: This retrospective health insurance claims data analysis included 16-23-year-olds who initiated MenB vaccination (index date) during January 2017 to November 2018 (MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database) or January 2017 to September 2018 (MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid Database) and had continuous enrollment for ≥6 months before and ≥15 months after index. The main outcome was MenB vaccine series completion within 15 months. Among noncompleters, preventive care/well-child and vaccine administrative office visits were identified as potential missed opportunities for series completion. Robust Poisson regression models identified independent predictors of series completion. RESULTS: In the Commercial (n = 156,080) and Medicaid (n = 57,082) populations, series completion was 56.7% and 44.7%, respectively, and was higher among those who initiated MenB-4C versus MenB-FHbp (61.1% versus 49.8% and 47.8% versus 33.9%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Among noncompleters, 40.2% and 34.7% of the Commercial and Medicaid populations, respectively, had ≥1 missed opportunity for series completion. Receipt of MenB-4C and younger age were independently associated with a higher probability of series completion. CONCLUSIONS: Series completion rates were suboptimal but were higher among those who initiated MenB-4C. To maximize the benefits of MenB vaccination, interventions to improve completion and reduce missed opportunities should be implemented.


Assuntos
Infecções Meningocócicas , Vacinas Meningocócicas , Neisseria meningitidis Sorogrupo B , Análise de Dados , Humanos , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Infecções Meningocócicas/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sorogrupo , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa