Unified Protocol Versus Self-Acceptance Group Therapy for Emotional Disorders in People With Severe Shame.

BACKGROUND: Severe shame is a distressing negative emotion, accompanied by intense feelings of worthlessness that contributes to a broad panoply of psychological disorders. This study aimed to compare the effects on shame dysregulation of two transdiagnostic treatments, the Unified Protocol (UP) and Self-Acceptance Group Therapy (SAGT). We additionally addressed the question of whether borderline personality disorder (BPD) can properly be regarded as an emotional disorder. The focus was on outcome measures, primarily shame that cut across individual diagnostic categories and capture emotional dysfunction broadly conceived. METHODS: Individuals suffering from a range of emotional disorders (including BPD) and high levels of shame were randomly allocated to treatment by either UP (N = 280) or SAGT (N = 282). Outcomes were measures of emotion dysfunction-shame, loneliness, neuroticism, emotional dysregulation, positive and negative affect-measured pre-treatment, post-treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: UP was superior to SAGT in showing better post-treatment retention of therapeutic gains on all outcome measures over the 6-month follow-up period. Compared with those without a BPD diagnosis, those diagnosed with BPD showed significantly higher neuroticism and emotion dysregulation at baseline and a similar post-treatment reduction in almost all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the use of both the UP and SAGT in the treatment of severe shame. The superiority of the UP over SAGT in reducing negative emotionality is interpreted in terms of the specific mechanisms targeted by the UP. The results provide support for the theoretical rationale for the UP as a treatment for dysregulated shame and for emotional dysfunction generally.

A vegetative storage protein improves drought tolerance in maize.

Vegetative storage proteins (VSPs) are known to serve as nitrogen reserves in many dicot plants but remain undiscovered in grasses, most widely grown group of crops globally. We identified and characterized a VSP in maize and demonstrated that its overexpression improved drought tolerance. Nitrogen supplementation selectively induced a mesophyll lipoxygenase (ZmLOX6), which was targeted to chloroplasts by a novel N-terminal transit peptide of 62 amino acids. When ectopically expressed under the control of various tissue-specific promoters, it accumulated to a fivefold higher level upon expression in the mesophyll cells than the wild-type plants. Constitutive expression or targeted expression specifically to the bundle sheath cells increased its accumulation by less than twofold. The overexpressed ZmLOX6 was remobilized from the leaves like other major proteins during grain development. Evaluated in the field over locations and years, transgenic hybrids overexpressing ZmLOX6 in the mesophyll cells significantly outyielded nontransgenic sibs under managed drought stress imposed at flowering. Additional storage of nitrogen as a VSP in maize leaves ameliorated the effect of drought on grain yield.

Pain assessment tools in paediatric palliative care: A systematic review of psychometric properties and recommendations for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Assessing pain in infants, children and young people with life-limiting conditions remains a challenge due to diverse patient conditions, types of pain and often a reduced ability or inability of patients to communicate verbally. AIM: To systematically identify pain assessment tools that are currently used in paediatric palliative care and examine their psychometric properties and feasibility and make recommendations for clinical practice. DESIGN: A systematic literature review and evaluation of psychometric properties of pain assessment tools of original peer-reviewed research published from inception of data sources to April 2021. DATA SOURCES: PsycINFO via ProQuest, Web of Science Core, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, BIOSIS and CINAHL were searched from inception to April 2021. Hand searches of reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were performed. RESULTS: From 1168 articles identified, 201 papers were selected for full-text assessment. Thirty-four articles met the eligibility criteria and we examined the psychometric properties of 22 pain assessment tools. Overall, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) had high cross-cultural validity, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and responsiveness; while the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale and Paediatric Pain Profile (PPP) had high internal consistency, criterion validity, reliability and responsiveness. The number of studies per psychometric property of each pain assessment tool was limited and the methodological quality of included studies was low. CONCLUSION: Balancing aspects of feasibility and psychometric properties, the FPS-R is recommended for self-assessment, and the FLACC scale/FLACC Revised and PPP are the recommended observational tools in their respective age groups.

Carer preferences of route of administration of transmucosal diamorphine and willingness to take part in a randomised controlled trial: an interview study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Children and young people are usually given liquid morphine by mouth for breakthrough pain, which can take thirty minutes to work. A faster-acting, quickly absorbed, needle-free pain medicine, that is easy to administer is needed such as transmucosal (sublingual, buccal, intranasal) diamorphine. Research evidence relating to the administration of medication for breakthrough pain in children and young people is limited. This study aims to describe the experiences and preferences of parents and/or children and young people regarding the route of administration of diamorphine, barriers and facilitators comparative to oral morphine, and participation in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews with parents and/or children and young people at home or hospital/hospice. RESULTS: Thirteen interviews with: nine mothers, one father, and three sets of parents jointly. No interviews took place with a child/young person. Most families had experience of the buccal route which was effective in ease of administration and time to control pain. The intranasal route was preferred by parents irrespective of experience. Parents' willingness for their child to take part in a trial depended on the time commitment, their child's pain trajectory and the stability of analgesic requirements. CONCLUSION: A randomised controlled trial of oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine would need to consider trial logistics, especially time commitment. Parents felt that the trial should be introduced initially by the clinical team, with written information from the research team, and sufficient time to ask questions. Patients who had discontinued oral morphine because of side effects, or those with gastrointestinal failure, should be excluded. Maintaining stability in pain management was essential to families, so the timing of the trial is a potential issue.

Healthcare professionals' views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain but the oral route is not always available and absorption is slow. Transmucosal diamorphine is administered by buccal, sublingual or intranasal routes, and rapidly absorbed. AIM: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals in the UK caring for children with life-limiting conditions concerning the assessment and management of breakthrough pain; prescribing and administration of transmucosal diamorphine compared with oral morphine; and the feasibility of a comparative clinical trial. DESIGN/ PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups, analysed using a Framework approach. Doctors, nurses and pharmacists (n = 28), caring for children with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliative care, participated. RESULTS: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain across all settings; with transmucosal diamorphine largely limited to use in hospices or given by community nurses, predominantly buccally. Perceived advantages of oral morphine included confidence in its use with no requirement for specific training; disadvantages included tolerability issues, slow onset, unpredictable response and unsuitability for patients with gastrointestinal failure. Perceived advantages of transmucosal diamorphine were quick onset and easy administration; barriers included lack of licensed preparations and prescribing guidance with fears over accountability of prescribers, and potential issues with availability, preparation and palatability. Factors potentially affecting recruitment to a trial were patient suitability and onerousness for families, trial design and logistics, staff time and clinician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: There were perceived advantages to transmucosal diamorphine, but there is a need for access to a safe preparation. A clinical trial would be feasible provided barriers were overcome.

Ancestral morphology of Ecdysozoa constrained by an early Cambrian stem group ecdysozoan.

BACKGROUND: Ecdysozoa are the moulting protostomes, including arthropods, tardigrades, and nematodes. Both the molecular and fossil records indicate that Ecdysozoa is an ancient group originating in the terminal Proterozoic, and exceptional fossil biotas show their dominance and diversity at the beginning of the Phanerozoic. However, the nature of the ecdysozoan common ancestor has been difficult to ascertain due to the extreme morphological diversity of extant Ecdysozoa, and the lack of early diverging taxa in ancient fossil biotas. RESULTS: Here we re-describe Acosmia maotiania from the early Cambrian Chengjiang Biota of Yunnan Province, China and assign it to stem group Ecdysozoa. Acosmia features a two-part body, with an anterior proboscis bearing a terminal mouth and muscular pharynx, and a posterior annulated trunk with a through gut. Morphological phylogenetic analyses of the protostomes using parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference, with coding informed by published experimental decay studies, each placed Acosmia as sister taxon to Cycloneuralia + Panarthropoda-i.e. stem group Ecdysozoa. Ancestral state probabilities were calculated for key ecdysozoan nodes, in order to test characters inferred from fossils to be ancestral for Ecdysozoa. Results support an ancestor of crown group ecdysozoans sharing an annulated vermiform body with a terminal mouth like Acosmia, but also possessing the pharyngeal armature and circumoral structures characteristic of Cambrian cycloneuralians and lobopodians. CONCLUSIONS: Acosmia is the first taxon placed in the ecdysozoan stem group and provides a constraint to test hypotheses on the early evolution of Ecdysozoa. Our study suggests acquisition of pharyngeal armature, and therefore a change in feeding strategy (e.g. predation), may have characterised the origin and radiation of crown group ecdysozoans from Acosmia-like ancestors.

We listed patients and we should transplant them.

Twenty percent of kidneys recovered for transplantation are discarded. The most common reason for not transplanting these kidneys is to organ quality and biopsy findings. Yet, organ quality measures are not associated with discard rates and kidneys with poorer quality measures lead to greater life span for the recipient compared to staying on dialysis. Biopsy findings are not correlated with graft survival in most cases. The risk aversion of transplant centers from using "high-risk" kidneys can be, in part at least, attributed to negative consequences of poor graft survival with possible program sanctions or possible loss of insurance contracts. CMS has taken a first step by eliminating short-term graft survival as a performance measure for transplant centers. Many of the discarded kidneys will provide good results if transplanted and would recognize that patients value getting a transplant above graft survival.

A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of barriers and facilitators to paediatric symptom management at end of life.

BACKGROUND: Symptom management for infants, children and young people at end of life is complex and challenging due to the range of conditions and differing care needs of individuals of different ages. A greater understanding of these challenges could inform the development of effective interventions. AIM: To investigate the barriers and facilitators experienced by patients, carers and healthcare professionals managing symptoms in infants, children and young people at end of life. DESIGN: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken (PROSPERO ID: CRD42019124797). DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database, Evidence Search and OpenGrey were electronically searched from the inception of each database for qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods studies that included data from patients, carers or healthcare professionals referring to barriers or facilitators to paediatric end-of-life symptom management. Studies underwent data extraction, quality appraisal, narrative thematic synthesis and meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 64 studies were included (32 quantitative, 18 qualitative and 14 mixed-methods) of medium-low quality. Themes were generated encompassing barriers/facilitators experienced by carers (treatment efficacy, treatment side effects, healthcare professionals' attitudes, hospice care, home care, families' symptom management strategies) and healthcare professionals (medicine access, treatment efficacy, healthcare professionals' demographics, treatment side effects, specialist support, healthcare professionals' training, health services delivery, home care). Only one study included patients' views. CONCLUSION: There is a need for effective communication between healthcare professionals and families, more training for healthcare professionals, improved symptom management planning including anticipatory prescribing, and urgent attention paid to the patients' perspective.

Performance Characterization of the Smartphone Video Guidance Sensor as Vision-Based Positioning System.

The Smartphone Video Guidance Sensor (SVGS) is a vision-based sensor that computes the six-state position and orientation vector of a target relative to a coordinate system attached to a smartphone. This paper presents accuracy-characterization measurements of the Smartphone Video Guidance Sensor (SVGS) to assess its performance as a position and attitude estimator, evaluating its accuracy in linear and angular motion for different velocities and various types of targets based on the mean and standard deviation errors between SVGS estimates and known motion profiles, in both linear and angular motions. The study also examines the effects of target velocity and sampling rate on the overall performance of SVGS and provides an overall assessment of SVGS' performance as a position/attitude estimator. While the error metrics are dependent on range and camera resolution, the results of this paper can be scaled to other operational conditions by scaling the blob size in pixels (the light markers identified in the images) relative to the total resolution (number of pixels) of the image. The error statistics of SVGS enable its incorporation (by synthesis of a Kalman estimator) in advanced motion-control systems for navigation and guidance.

Pediatric Erythromelalgia and SCN9A Mutations: Systematic Review and Single-Center Case Series.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical features of erythromelalgia in childhood associated with gain-of-function SCN9A mutations that increase activity of the Nav1.7 voltage-gated sodium channel, we conducted a systematic review of pediatric presentations of erythromelalgia related to SCN9A mutations, and compared pediatric clinical presentations of symptomatic erythromelalgia, with or without SCN9A mutations. STUDY DESIGN: PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO Databases were searched for reports of inherited erythromelalgia in childhood. Clinical features, management, and genotype were extracted. Case notes of pediatric patients with erythromelalgia from the Great Ormond Street Hospital Pain Service were reviewed for clinical features, patient-reported outcomes, and treatments. Children aged over 10 years were recruited for quantitative sensory testing. RESULTS: Twenty-eight publications described erythromelalgia associated with 15 different SCN9A gene variants in 25 children. Pain was severe and often refractory to multiple treatments, including nonspecific sodium channel blockers. Skin damage or other complications of cold immersion for symptomatic relief were common (60%). SCN9A mutations resulting in greater hyperpolarizing shifts in Nav1.7 sodium channels correlated with symptom onset at younger ages (P = .016). Variability in reporting, and potential publication bias toward severe cases, limit any estimations of overall prevalence. In our case series, symptoms were similar but comorbidities were more common in children with SCN9A mutations. Quantitative sensory testing revealed marked dynamic warm allodynia. CONCLUSIONS: Inherited erythromelalgia in children is associated with difficult-to-manage pain and significant morbidity. Standardized reporting of outcome and management in larger series will strengthen identification of genotype-phenotype relationships. More effective long-term therapies are a significant unmet clinical need.

Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Antidepressants have been used in adults for pain relief and pain management since the 1970s. The clinical impression from extended use over many years is that antidepressants are useful for some neuropathic pain symptoms, and that effects on pain relief are divorced and different from effects on depression; for example, the effects of tricyclic antidepressants on pain may occur at different, and often lower, doses than those on depression. Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used drugs for treating neuropathic pain in the UK. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antidepressants used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antidepressant with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies with a total of 272 participants (6 to 18 years of age) who had either chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, or functional dyspepsia. All of the studies were small. One study investigated amitriptyline versus gabapentin (34 participants), two studies investigated amitriptyline versus placebo (123 participants), and one study investigated citalopram versus placebo (115 participants). Due to a lack of available data we were unable to complete any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the four included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation and allocation concealment (low to unclear risk); blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors (low to unclear risk); reporting of results (low to unclear risk); and size of the study populations (high risk). We judged the remaining domains, attrition and other potential sources of bias, as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesNo studies reported our primary outcomes of participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater or 50% or greater (very low-quality evidence).No studies reported on Patient Global Impression of Change (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low because there was no evidence to support or refute. Secondary outcomesAll studies measured adverse events, with very few reported (11 out of 272 participants). All but one adverse event occurred in the active treatment groups (amitriptyline, citalopram, and gabapentin). Adverse events in all studies, across active treatment and comparator groups, were considered to be a mild reaction, such as nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, and abdominal discomfort (very low-quality evidence).There were also very few withdrawals due to adverse events, again all but one from the active treatment groups (very low-quality evidence).No serious adverse events were reported across any of the studies (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for these secondary outcomes as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified only a small number of studies with small numbers of participants and insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.There is evidence from adult randomised controlled trials that some antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, can provide some pain relief in certain chronic non-cancer pain conditions.There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children or adolescents.

Antiepileptic drugs for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can occur in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) relating to genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and for other unknown reasons.Antiepileptic (anticonvulsant) drugs, which were originally developed to treat convulsions in people with epilepsy, have in recent years been used to provide pain relief in adults for many chronic painful conditions and are now recommended for the treatment of chronic pain in the WHO list of essential medicines. Known side effects of antiepileptic drugs range from sweating, headache, elevated temperature, nausea, and abdominal pain to more serious effects including mental or motor function impairment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antiepileptic drugs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews as well as online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, by any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antiepileptic drug with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods if data were available. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created two 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with a total of 141 participants (aged 7 to 18 years) with chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-I), or fibromyalgia. One study investigated pregabalin versus placebo in participants with fibromyalgia (107 participants), and the other study investigated gabapentin versus amitriptyline in participants with CRPS-I or neuropathic pain (34 participants). We were unable to perform any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the two included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation (low to unclear risk), blinding of outcome assessors (low to unclear risk), reporting bias (low to unclear risk), the size of the study populations (high risk), and industry funding in the 'other' domain (low to unclear risk). We judged the remaining domains of sequence generation, blinding of participants and personnel, and attrition as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesOne study (gabapentin 900 mg/day versus amitriptyline 10 mg/day, 34 participants, for 6 weeks) did not report our primary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).The second study (pregabalin 75 to 450 mg/day versus placebo 75 to 450 mg/day, 107 participants, for 15 weeks) reported no significant change in pain scores for pain relief of 30% or greater between pregabalin 18/54 (33.3%), and placebo 16/51 (31.4%), P = 0.83 (very low-quality evidence). This study also reported Patient Global Impression of Change, with the percentage of participants feeling "much or very much improved" with pregabalin 53.1%, and placebo 29.5% (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low for one of two reasons: due to the fact that there was no evidence to support or refute the use of the intervention, or that there were too few data and the number of events was too small to be meaningful. Secondary outcomesIn one small study, adverse events were uncommon: gabapentin 2 participants (2 adverse events); amitriptyline 1 participant (1 adverse event) (6-week trial). The second study reported a higher number of adverse events: pregabalin 38 participants (167 adverse events); placebo 34 participants (132 adverse events) (15-week trial) (very low-quality evidence).Withdrawals due to adverse events were infrequent in both studies: pregabalin (4 participants), placebo (4 participants), gabapentin (2 participants), and amitriptyline (1 participant) (very low-quality evidence).Serious adverse events were reported in both studies. One study reported only one serious adverse event (cholelithiasis and major depression resulting in hospitalisation in the pregabalin group) and the other study reported no serious adverse events (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only two small studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we were unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we could not comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some antiepileptics, such as gabapentin and pregabalin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.We found no evidence to support or refute the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

The medical science fiction of James White: Inside and Outside Sector General.

James White was a Northern Irish science fiction author working in the subgenre of medical science fiction from the mid-1950s to the end of the twentieth century. The aim of this article is to introduce White to scholars working in the medical humanities, pointing to features of interest and critiquing the more excessive utopian impulses of the author. The article covers White's Sector General series, set on a vast intergalactic hospital, as well as the author's standalone fictions.

Broad 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor herbicide tolerance in soybean with an optimized enzyme and expression cassette.

With an optimized expression cassette consisting of the soybean (Glycine max) native promoter modified for enhanced expression driving a chimeric gene coding for the soybean native amino-terminal 86 amino acids fused to an insensitive shuffled variant of maize (Zea mays) 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD), we achieved field tolerance in transgenic soybean plants to the HPPD-inhibiting herbicides mesotrione, isoxaflutole, and tembotrione. Directed evolution of maize HPPD was accomplished by progressively incorporating amino acids from naturally occurring diversity and novel substitutions identified by saturation mutagenesis, combined at random through shuffling. Localization of heterologously expressed HPPD mimicked that of the native enzyme, which was shown to be dually targeted to chloroplasts and the cytosol. Analysis of the native soybean HPPD gene revealed two transcription start sites, leading to transcripts encoding two HPPD polypeptides. The N-terminal region of the longer encoded peptide directs proteins to the chloroplast, while the short form remains in the cytosol. In contrast, maize HPPD was found almost exclusively in chloroplasts. Evolved HPPD enzymes showed insensitivity to five inhibitor herbicides. In 2013 field trials, transgenic soybean events made with optimized promoter and HPPD variant expression cassettes were tested with three herbicides and showed tolerance to four times the labeled rates of mesotrione and isoxaflutole and two times the labeled rates of tembotrione.

Pharmacological interventions for pain in children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions.

BACKGROUND: Pain is one of the most common symptoms in children and young people (CYP) with life-limiting conditions (LLCs) which include a wide range of diagnoses including cancer. The current literature indicates that pain is not well managed, however the evidence base to guide clinicians is limited. There is a clear need for evidence from a systematic review to inform prescribing. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness of different pharmacological interventions used for pain in CYP with LLCs. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched up to December 2014: CENTRAL (in the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL. In addition, we searched conference proceedings and reference lists of included studies. For completeness, we also contacted experts in the field. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised studies and other studies that included a clearly defined comparator group were included. The studies investigated pharmacological treatments for pain associated with LLCs in CYP. The treatment included those specifically developed to treat pain and those that acted as an adjuvant, where the treatment was not primarily developed to treat pain but has pain relieving properties. The LLC was identified by its inclusion in the Richard Hain Directory of LLCs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Citations were screened by five review authors. Data were extracted by one review author and checked by a second. Two review authors assessed the risk of bias of included studies. A sufficient number of studies using homogeneous outcomes was not identified so a meta-analysis was not possible. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 24,704 citations from our database search. Nine trials with 379 participants fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Participants had cerebral palsy (CP) in five of the studies and osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) in the other four. Participants across the trials ranged in age from 2 to 19 years. All studies, apart from one cross-over trial, were parallel designed RCTs. Three of the trials on CP evaluated intrathecal baclofen (ITB) and two botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A). All of the OI trials evaluated the use of bisphosphonates (two alendronate and one pamidronate). No trials were identified that evaluated a commonly used analgesic in this patient group. Pain was a secondary outcome in five of the eight identified studies. Overall the quality of the trials was mixed. Only one study involved over 100 participants.For the two ITB studies for pain in CP, in the same study population but assessed at different time points in their disease, both found an effect on pain favouring the intervention compared to the control group (standard care or placebo) (mean difference (MD) 4.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.15 to 6.25; MD 26.60, 95% CI 2.61 to 50.59, respectively). In these studies most of the adverse events related to the procedure or device for administration rather than the drug, such as swelling at the pump site. In one trial there were also eight serious adverse effects; these included difficulty swallowing and an epileptic seizure. The trial did not state if these occurred in the intervention group. At follow-up in both BoNT-A trials there was no evidence of a difference in pain between the trial arms among CP participants. The adverse events in the BoNT-A trials mostly involved those who received the intervention drug and involved seizures. Gastrointestinal problems were the most frequent adverse event in those who received alendronate. The trial investigating pamidronate found no evidence of a difference in pain compared to the control group. No adverse events were reported in this trial. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Published, controlled evidence on the pharmacological interventions for pain in CYP with LLCs is limited. The evidence that is currently available evaluated pain largely as a secondary outcome and the drugs used were all adjuvants and not always commonly used in general paediatric palliative care for pain. Based on current data this systematic review is unable to determine the effects of pharmacological interventions for pain for CYP with LLCs. Future trials with larger populations should examine the effects of the drugs commonly used as analgesics; with the rising prevalence of many LLCs this becomes more necessary.

A novel multipatient intranasal diamorphine spray for use in acute pain in children: pharmacovigilance data from an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the safety of an intranasal diamorphine (IND) spray in children. DESIGN: An open-label, single-dose pharmacovigilance trial. SETTING: Emergency departments in eight UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 2-16 years with a fracture or other trauma. OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse events (AE) specifically related to nasal irritation, respiratory and central nervous system depression. RESULTS: 226 patients received 0.1 mg/kg IND. No serious or severe AEs occurred. The incidence of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) was 26.5% (95% CI 20.9% to 32.8%), 93% being mild. 89% were related to treatment, all being known effects of the drug or route of administration except for three events in two patients. 20.4% (95% CI 15.3% to 26.2%) patients reported nasal irritation, all mild except one moderate and one 'unknown' severity. No respiratory depression was reported. Three AEs related to reduced Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) occurred, all mild. CONCLUSIONS: There were no safety concerns raised during the conduct of the study. In addition to expected side effects, IND can cause mild nasal irritation in a proportion of patients. EUROPEAN UNION DRUG REGULATING AUTHORITIES CLINICAL TRIAL NO: 2009-014982-16.