| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Aartsen, M. G., et al.
(author)
-
Very high-energy gamma-ray follow-up program using neutrino triggers from IceCube
- 2016
-
In: Journal of Instrumentation. - 1748-0221 .- 1748-0221. ; 11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We describe and report the status of a neutrino-triggered program in IceCube that generates real-time alerts for gamma-ray follow-up observations by atmospheric-Cherenkov telescopes (MAGIC and VERITAS). While IceCube is capable of monitoring the whole sky continuously, high-energy gamma-ray telescopes have restricted fields of view and in general are unlikely to be observing a potential neutrino-flaring source at the time such neutrinos are recorded. The use of neutrino-triggered alerts thus aims at increasing the availability of simultaneous multi-messenger data during potential neutrino flaring activity, which can increase the discovery potential and constrain the phenomenological interpretation of the high-energy emission of selected source classes (e. g. blazars). The requirements of a fast and stable online analysis of potential neutrino signals and its operation are presented, along with first results of the program operating between 14 March 2012 and 31 December 2015.
|
|
| 3. |
- Abramowski, A., et al.
(author)
-
The 2010 very high energy gamma-RAY flare and 10 years of multi-wavelength observations of M 87
- 2012
-
In: Astrophysical Journal. - 0004-637X .- 1538-4357. ; 746:2, s. 151-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The giant radio galaxy M 87 with its proximity (16 Mpc), famous jet, and very massive black hole ((3-6) x 10(9) M-circle dot) provides a unique opportunity to investigate the origin of very high energy (VHE; E > 100 GeV) gamma-ray emission generated in relativistic outflows and the surroundings of supermassive black holes. M 87 has been established as a VHE gamma-ray emitter since 2006. The VHE gamma-ray emission displays strong variability on timescales as short as a day. In this paper, results from a joint VHE monitoring campaign on M 87 by the MAGIC and VERITAS instruments in 2010 are reported. During the campaign, a flare at VHE was detected triggering further observations at VHE (H.E.S.S.), X-rays (Chandra), and radio (43 GHz Very Long Baseline Array, VLBA). The excellent sampling of the VHE gamma-ray light curve enables one to derive a precise temporal characterization of the flare: the single, isolated flare is well described by a two-sided exponential function with significantly different flux rise and decay times of tau(rise)(d) = (1.69 +/- 0.30) days and tau(decay)(d) = (0.611 +/- 0.080) days, respectively. While the overall variability pattern of the 2010 flare appears somewhat different from that of previous VHE flares in 2005 and 2008, they share very similar timescales (similar to day), peak fluxes (Phi(>0.35 TeV) similar or equal to (1-3) x 10(-11) photons cm(-2) s(-1)), and VHE spectra. VLBA radio observations of 43 GHz of the inner jet regions indicate no enhanced flux in 2010 in contrast to observations in 2008, where an increase of the radio flux of the innermost core regions coincided with a VHE flare. On the other hand, Chandra X-ray observations taken similar to 3 days after the peak of the VHE gamma-ray emission reveal an enhanced flux from the core (flux increased by factor similar to 2; variability timescale <2 days). The long-term (2001-2010) multi-wavelength (MWL) light curve of M 87, spanning from radio to VHE and including data from Hubble Space Telescope, Liverpool Telescope, Very Large Array, and European VLBI Network, is used to further investigate the origin of the VHE gamma-ray emission. No unique, common MWL signature of the three VHE flares has been identified. In the outer kiloparsec jet region, in particular in HST-1, no enhanced MWL activity was detected in 2008 and 2010, disfavoring it as the origin of the VHE flares during these years. Shortly after two of the three flares (2008 and 2010), the X-ray core was observed to be at a higher flux level than its characteristic range (determined from more than 60 monitoring observations: 2002-2009). In 2005, the strong flux dominance of HST-1 could have suppressed the detection of such a feature. Published models for VHE gamma-ray emission from M 87 are reviewed in the light of the new data.
|
|
| 4. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
In: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 5. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Mortality outcomes with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 from an international collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials
- 2021
-
In: Nature Communications. - : Springer Nature. - 2041-1723. ; 12:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Substantial COVID-19 research investment has been allocated to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, which currently face recruitment challenges or early discontinuation. We aim to estimate the effects of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished. We present a rapid meta-analysis of ongoing, completed, or discontinued RCTs on hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment for any COVID-19 patients (protocol: https://osf.io/QESV4/). We systematically identified unpublished RCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Cochrane COVID-registry up to June 11, 2020), and published RCTs (PubMed, medRxiv and bioRxiv up to October 16, 2020). All-cause mortality has been extracted (publications/preprints) or requested from investigators and combined in random-effects meta-analyses, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Prespecified subgroup analyses include patient setting, diagnostic confirmation, control type, and publication status. Sixty-three trials were potentially eligible. We included 14 unpublished trials (1308 patients) and 14 publications/preprints (9011 patients). Results for hydroxychloroquine are dominated by RECOVERY and WHO SOLIDARITY, two highly pragmatic trials, which employed relatively high doses and included 4716 and 1853 patients, respectively (67% of the total sample size). The combined OR on all-cause mortality for hydroxychloroquine is 1.11 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.20; I-2=0%; 26 trials; 10,012 patients) and for chloroquine 1.77 (95%CI: 0.15, 21.13, I-2=0%; 4 trials; 307 patients). We identified no subgroup effects. We found that treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of chloroquine. Findings have unclear generalizability to outpatients, children, pregnant women, and people with comorbidities. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been investigated as a potential treatment for Covid-19 in several clinical trials. Here the authors report a meta-analysis of published and unpublished trials, and show that treatment with hydroxychloroquine for patients with Covid-19 was associated with increased mortality, and there was no benefit from chloroquine.
|
|
