| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
-
- 2019
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 3. |
- Thompson, Paul M., et al.
(författare)
-
The ENIGMA Consortium : large-scale collaborative analyses of neuroimaging and genetic data
- 2014
-
Ingår i: BRAIN IMAGING BEHAV. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1931-7557 .- 1931-7565. ; 8:2, s. 153-182
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Consortium is a collaborative network of researchers working together on a range of large-scale studies that integrate data from 70 institutions worldwide. Organized into Working Groups that tackle questions in neuroscience, genetics, and medicine, ENIGMA studies have analyzed neuroimaging data from over 12,826 subjects. In addition, data from 12,171 individuals were provided by the CHARGE consortium for replication of findings, in a total of 24,997 subjects. By meta-analyzing results from many sites, ENIGMA has detected factors that affect the brain that no individual site could detect on its own, and that require larger numbers of subjects than any individual neuroimaging study has currently collected. ENIGMA's first project was a genome-wide association study identifying common variants in the genome associated with hippocampal volume or intracranial volume. Continuing work is exploring genetic associations with subcortical volumes (ENIGMA2) and white matter microstructure (ENIGMA-DTI). Working groups also focus on understanding how schizophrenia, bipolar illness, major depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affect the brain. We review the current progress of the ENIGMA Consortium, along with challenges and unexpected discoveries made on the way.
|
|
| 4. |
- Barbaud, Annick, et al.
(författare)
-
Allergies and COVID-19 vaccines : An ENDA/EAACI Position paper
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Allergy. European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0105-4538 .- 1398-9995. ; 77:8, s. 2292-2312
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Anaphylaxis, which is rare, has been reported after COVID-19 vaccination, but its management is not standardized.Method Members of the European Network for Drug Allergy and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology interested in drug allergy participated in an online questionnaire on pre-vaccination screening and management of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, and literature was analysed.Results No death due to anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines has been confirmed in scientific literature. Potential allergens, polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate and tromethamine are excipients. The authors propose allergy evaluation of persons with the following histories: 1-anaphylaxis to injectable drug or vaccine containing PEG or derivatives; 2-anaphylaxis to oral/topical PEG containing products; 3-recurrent anaphylaxis of unknown cause; 4-suspected or confirmed allergy to any mRNA vaccine; and 5-confirmed allergy to PEG or derivatives. We recommend a prick-to-prick skin test with the left-over solution in the suspected vaccine vial to avoid waste. Prick test panel should include PEG 4000 or 3500, PEG 2000 and polysorbate 80. The value of in vitro test is arguable.Conclusions These recommendations will lead to a better knowledge of the management and mechanisms involved in anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines and enable more people with history of allergy to be vaccinated.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bafadhel, Mona, et al.
(författare)
-
Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease : Identification of Biologic Clusters and Their Biomarkers
- 2011
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. - 1073-449X .- 1535-4970. ; 184:6, s. 662-671
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Rationale: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are heterogeneous with respect to inflammation and etiology. Objectives: Investigate biomarker expression in COPD exacerbations to identify biologic clusters and determine biomarkers that recognize clinical COPD exacerbation phenotypes, namely those associated with bacteria, viruses, or eosinophilic airway inflammation. Methods: Patients with COPD were observed for 1 year at stable and exacerbation visits. Biomarkers were measured in sputum and serum. Viruses and selected bacteria were assessed in sputum by polymerase chain reaction and routine diagnostic bacterial culture. Biologic phenotypes were explored using unbiased cluster analysis and biomarkers that differentiated clinical exacerbation phenotypes were investigated. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 145 patients (101 men and 44 women) entered the study. A total of 182 exacerbations were captured from 86 patients. Four distinct biologic exacerbation clusters were identified. These were bacterial-, viral-, or eosinophilic-predominant, and a fourth associated with limited changes in the inflammatory profile termed "pauciinflammatory." Of all exacerbations, 55%, 29%, and 28% were associated with bacteria, virus, or a sputum eosinophilia. The biomarkers that best identified these clinical phenotypes were sputum IL-1 beta, 0.89 (area under receiver operating characteristic curve) (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.95); serum CXCL10, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.70-0.96); and percentage peripheral eosinophils, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93), respectively. Conclusions: The heterogeneity of the biologic response of COPD exacerbations can be defined. Sputum IL-1 beta, serum CXCL10, and peripheral eosinophils are biomarkers of bacteria-, virus-, or eosinophil-associated exacerbations of COPD. Whether phenotype-specific biomarkers can be applied to direct therapy warrants further investigation.
|
|
| 6. |
- Bafadhel, Mona, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood Eosinophils to Direct Corticosteroid Treatment of Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial
- 2012
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. - 1073-449X .- 1535-4970. ; 186:1, s. 48-55
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Rationale: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and responses to treatment are heterogeneous. Objectives: Investigate the usefulness of blood eosinophils to direct corticosteroid therapy during exacerbations. Methods: Subjects with COPD exacerbations were entered into a randomized biomarker-directed double-blind corticosteroid versus standard therapy study. Subjects in the standard arm received prednisolone for 2 weeks, whereas in the biomarker-directed arm, prednisolone or matching placebo was given according to the blood eosinophil count biomarker. Both study groups received antibiotics. Blood eosinophils were measured in the biomarker-directed and standard therapy arms to define biomarker-positive and -negative exacerbations (blood eosinophil count > and <= 2%, respectively). The primary outcome was to determine noninferiority in health status using the chronic respiratory questionnaire (CRQ) and in the proportion of exacerbations associated with a treatment failure between subjects allocated to the biomarker-directed and standard therapy arms. Measurements and Main Results: There were 86 and 80 exacerbations in the biomarker-directed and standard treatment groups, respectively. In the biomarker-directed group, 49% of the exacerbations were not treated with prednisolone. CRQ improvement after treatment in the standard and biomarker-directed therapy groups was similar (0.8 vs. 1.1; mean difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.6; P = 0.05). There was a greater improvement in CRQ in biomarker-negative exacerbations given placebo compared with those given prednisolone (mean difference, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.90; P = 0.04). In biomarker-negative exacerbations, treatment failures occurred in 15% given prednisolone and 2% of those given placebo (P = 0.04). Conclusions: The peripheral blood eosinophil count is a promising biomarker to direct corticosteroid therapy during COPD exacerbations, but larger studies are required.
|
|
| 7. |
- Riggioni, Carmen, et al.
(författare)
-
A compendium answering 150 questions on COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. - : Wiley. - 0105-4538. ; 75:10, s. 2503-2541
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In December 2019, China reported the first cases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This disease, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome–related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has developed into a pandemic. To date, it has resulted in ~9 million confirmed cases and caused almost 500 000 related deaths worldwide. Unequivocally, the COVID-19 pandemic is the gravest health and socioeconomic crisis of our time. In this context, numerous questions have emerged in demand of basic scientific information and evidence-based medical advice on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Although the majority of the patients show a very mild, self-limiting viral respiratory disease, many clinical manifestations in severe patients are unique to COVID-19, such as severe lymphopenia and eosinopenia, extensive pneumonia, a “cytokine storm” leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome, endothelitis, thromboembolic complications, and multiorgan failure. The epidemiologic features of COVID-19 are distinctive and have changed throughout the pandemic. Vaccine and drug development studies and clinical trials are rapidly growing at an unprecedented speed. However, basic and clinical research on COVID-19–related topics should be based on more coordinated high-quality studies. This paper answers pressing questions, formulated by young clinicians and scientists, on SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and allergy, focusing on the following topics: virology, immunology, diagnosis, management of patients with allergic disease and asthma, treatment, clinical trials, drug discovery, vaccine development, and epidemiology. A total of 150 questions were answered by experts in the field providing a comprehensive and practical overview of COVID-19 and allergic disease.
|
|
