| 1. |
- Abelson, Klas S. P., et al.
(författare)
-
Distribution of [3H]-corticosterone in urine, feces and blood of male Sprague-Dawley rats after tail vein and jugular vein injections
- 2009
-
Ingår i: In Vivo. - : International Institute of Anticancer Research. - 0258-851X .- 1791-7549. ; 23:3, s. 381-386
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The present study aimed to investigate the time-course and distribution of [(3)H]-corticosterone in urine, feces and blood of male Sprague-Dawley rats after intravenous administration of a low dose (1 microCi), and to investigate whether different intravenous routes of administration may affect the dynamics of excreted [(3)H]-corticosterone in the feces. One microCi [(3)H]-corticosterone was injected intravenously either through the tail vein in manually restrained rats or through a jugular vein catheter three days after surgical implantation. Urine and feces were collected at different time points over 78 h from the rats injected in the tail vein, and blood and feces were collected over 48 h from rats injected in the jugular vein. In the blood, radioactivity peaked immediately and decreased rapidly within 90 minutes. The radioactivity was excreted in urine within six h and in feces after at least 12 h. Sixty percent of the radioactivity was detected in the urine and 40% in feces during the study period of 78 h. The detected amount of radioactivity in feces was higher and displayed a more pronounced peak 12 h after injection when the substance was administered through a jugular vein catheter compared to tail vein injection. The data obtained in the present study may serve as an important benchmark when choosing time points for fecal collection for quantification of corticosterone or corticosterone metabolites as a non-invasive measure of preceding HPA-axis activation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kapiriri, Lydia, et al.
(författare)
-
Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans : a comparative analysis of 18 African countries
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Health Policy and Planning. - : Oxford University Press. - 0268-1080 .- 1460-2237. ; 37:3, s. 297-309
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Priority setting represents an even bigger challenge during public health emergencies than routine times. This is because such emergencies compete with routine programmes for the available health resources, strain health systems and shift health-care attention and resources towards containing the spread of the epidemic and treating those that fall seriously ill. This paper is part of a larger global study, the aim of which is to evaluate the degree to which national COVID-19 preparedness and response plans incorporated priority setting concepts. It provides important insights into what and how priority decisions were made in the context of a pandemic. Specifically, with a focus on a sample of 18 African countries pandemic plans, the paper aims to: (1) explore the degree to which the documented priority setting processes adhere to established quality indicators of effective priority setting and (2) examine if there is a relationship between the number of quality indicators present in the pandemic plans and the countrys economic context, health system and prior experiences with disease outbreaks. All the reviewed plans contained some aspects of expected priority setting processes but none of the national plans addressed all quality parameters. Most of the parameters were mentioned by less than 10 of the 18 country plans reviewed, and several plans identified one or two aspects of fair priority setting processes. Very few plans identified equity as a criterion for priority setting. Since the parameters are relevant to the quality of priority setting that is implemented during public health emergencies and most of the countries have pre-existing pandemic plans; it would be advisable that, for the future (if not already happening), countries consider priority setting as a critical part of their routine health emergency and disease outbreak plans. Such an approach would ensure that priority setting is integral to pandemic planning, response and recovery.
|
|
| 3. |
- Mittler, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Human antibody recognizing a quaternary epitope in the Puumala virus glycoprotein provides broad protection against orthohantaviruses
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Science Translational Medicine. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science. - 1946-6234 .- 1946-6242. ; 14:636
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The rodent-borne hantavirus Puumala virus (PUUV) and related agents cause hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) in humans. Other hantaviruses, including Andes virus (ANDV) and Sin Nombre virus, cause a distinct zoonotic disease, hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome (HCPS). Although these infections are severe and have substantial case fatality rates, no FDA-approved hantavirus countermeasures are available. Recent work suggests that monoclonal antibodies may have therapeutic utility. We describe here the isolation of human neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against tetrameric Gn/Gc glycoprotein spikes from PUUV-experienced donors. We define a dominant class of nAbs recognizing the "capping loop" of Gn that masks the hydrophobic fusion loops in Gc. A subset of nAbs in this class, including ADI-42898, bound Gn/Gc complexes but not Gn alone, strongly suggesting that they recognize a quaternary epitope encompassing both Gn and Gc. ADI-42898 blocked the cell entry of seven HCPS- and HFRS-associated hantaviruses, and single doses of this nAb could protect Syrian hamsters and bank voles challenged with the highly virulent HCPS-causing ANDV and HFRS-causing PUUV, respectively. ADI-42898 is a promising candidate for clinical development as a countermeasure for both HCPS and HFRS, and its mode of Gn/Gc recognition informs the development of broadly protective hantavirus vaccines.
|
|
| 4. |
- Oortwijn, Wija, et al.
(författare)
-
Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment : A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force
- 2022
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. - Cambridge, United Kingdom : Cambridge University Press. - 0266-4623 .- 1471-6348. ; 38:1, s. 1-16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives Deliberative processes for health technology assessment (HTA) are intended to facilitate participatory decision making, using discussion and open dialogue between stakeholders. Increasing attention is being given to deliberative processes, but guidance is lacking for those who wish to design or use them. Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research initiated a joint Task Force to address this gap.Methods The joint Task Force consisted of fifteen members with different backgrounds, perspectives, and expertise relevant to the field. It developed guidance and a checklist for deliberative processes for HTA. The guidance builds upon the few, existing initiatives in the field, as well as input from the HTA community following an established consultation plan. In addition, the guidance was subject to two rounds of peer review.Results A deliberative process for HTA consists of procedures, activities, and events that support the informed and critical examination of an issue and the weighing of arguments and evidence to guide a subsequent decision. Guidance and an accompanying checklist are provided for (i) developing the governance and structure of an HTA program and (ii) informing how the various stages of an HTA process might be managed using deliberation.Conclusions The guidance and the checklist contain a series of questions, grouped by six phases of a model deliberative process. They are offered as practical tools for those wishing to establish or improve deliberative processes for HTA that are fit for local contexts. The tools can also be used for independent scrutiny of deliberative processes.
|
|
| 5. |
- Oortwijn, Wija, et al.
(författare)
-
Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment: A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Value in Health. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 1098-3015 .- 1524-4733. ; 25:6, s. 869-886
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Deliberative processes for health technology assessment (HTA) are intended to facilitate participatory decision making, using discussion and open dialogue between stakeholders. Increasing attention is being given to deliberative processes, but guidance is lacking for those who wish to design or use them. Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research initiated a joint Task Force to address this gap. Methods: The joint Task Force consisted of 15 members with different backgrounds, perspectives, and expertise relevant to the field. It developed guidance and a checklist for deliberative processes for HTA. The guidance builds upon the few, existing initiatives in the field, as well as input from the HTA community following an established consultation plan. In addition, the guidance was subject to 2 rounds of peer review. Results: A deliberative process for HTA consists of procedures, activities, and events that support the informed and critical examination of an issue and the weighing of arguments and evidence to guide a subsequent decision. Guidance and an accompanying checklist are provided for (i) developing the governance and structure of an HTA program and (ii) informing how the various stages of an HTA process might be managed using deliberation. Conclusions: The guidance and the checklist contain a series of questions, grouped by 6 phases of a model deliberative process. They are offered as practical tools for those wishing to establish or improve deliberative processes for HTA that are fit for local contexts. The tools can also be used for independent scrutiny of deliberative processes.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
