| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Gilbert, M. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Perspectives on multiscale modelling and experiments to accelerate materials development for fusion
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Nuclear Materials. - : Elsevier BV. - 0022-3115 .- 1873-4820. ; 554
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Prediction of material performance in fusion reactor environments relies on computational modelling, and will continue to do so until the first generation of fusion power plants come on line and allow long-term behaviour to be observed. In the meantime, the modelling is supported by experiments that attempt to replicate some aspects of the eventual operational conditions. In 2019, a group of leading experts met under the umbrella of the IEA to discuss the current position and ongoing challenges in modelling of fusion materials and how advanced experimental characterisation is aiding model improvement. This review draws from the discussions held during that workshop. Topics covering modelling of irradiation-induced defect production and fundamental properties, gas behaviour, clustering and segregation, defect evolution and interactions are discussed, as well as new and novel multiscale simulation approaches, and the latest effort s to link modelling to experiments through advanced observation and characterisation techniques.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Tay, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Pre-transplant marital status and hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Current Oncology. - : MULTIMED INC. - 1198-0052 .- 1718-7729. ; 27:6, s. E596-E606
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Evidence about the impact of marital status before hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) on outcomes after HCT is conflicting. Methods We identified patients 40 years of age and older within the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry who underwent HCT between January 2008 and December 2015. Marital status before HCT was declared as one of: married or living with a partner, single (never married), separated or divorced, and widowed. We performed a multivariable analysis to determine the association of marital status with outcomes after HCT. Results We identified 10,226 allogeneic and 5714 autologous HCT cases with, respectively, a median follow-up of 37 months (range: 1-102 months) and 40 months (range: 1-106 months). No association between marital status and overall survival was observed in either the allogeneic (p = 0.58) or autologous (p = 0.17) setting. However, marital status was associated with grades 2-4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), p < 0.001, and chronic GVHD, p = 0.04. The risk of grades 2-4 acute GVHD was increased in separated compared with married patients [hazard ratio (FIR): 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03 to 1.24], and single patients had a reduced risk of grades 2-4 acute GVHD (FIR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.77 to 0.98). The risk of chronic GVHD was lower in widowed compared with married patients (FIR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.99). Conclusions Overall survival after HCT is not influenced by marital status, but associations were evident between marital status and grades 2-4 acute and chronic GVHD. To better appreciate the effects of marital status and social support, future research should consider using validated scales to measure social support and patient and caregiver reports of caregiver commitment, and to assess health-related quality of life together with health care utilization.
|
|
| 8. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(författare)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)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.
|
|
| 9. |
- Fromentin, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Microbiome and metabolome features of the cardiometabolic disease spectrum
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Nature Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1078-8956 .- 1546-170X. ; 28:2, s. 303-314
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- By studying individuals along a spectrum of cardiometabolic disease and adjusting for effects of lifestyle and medication, this investigation identifies alterations of the metabolome and microbiome from dysmetabolic conditions, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes, to ischemic heart disease. Previous microbiome and metabolome analyses exploring non-communicable diseases have paid scant attention to major confounders of study outcomes, such as common, pre-morbid and co-morbid conditions, or polypharmacy. Here, in the context of ischemic heart disease (IHD), we used a study design that recapitulates disease initiation, escalation and response to treatment over time, mirroring a longitudinal study that would otherwise be difficult to perform given the protracted nature of IHD pathogenesis. We recruited 1,241 middle-aged Europeans, including healthy individuals, individuals with dysmetabolic morbidities (obesity and type 2 diabetes) but lacking overt IHD diagnosis and individuals with IHD at three distinct clinical stages-acute coronary syndrome, chronic IHD and IHD with heart failure-and characterized their phenome, gut metagenome and serum and urine metabolome. We found that about 75% of microbiome and metabolome features that distinguish individuals with IHD from healthy individuals after adjustment for effects of medication and lifestyle are present in individuals exhibiting dysmetabolism, suggesting that major alterations of the gut microbiome and metabolome might begin long before clinical onset of IHD. We further categorized microbiome and metabolome signatures related to prodromal dysmetabolism, specific to IHD in general or to each of its three subtypes or related to escalation or de-escalation of IHD. Discriminant analysis based on specific IHD microbiome and metabolome features could better differentiate individuals with IHD from healthy individuals or metabolically matched individuals as compared to the conventional risk markers, pointing to a pathophysiological relevance of these features.
|
|
| 10. |
- Gerkin, Richard C., et al.
(författare)
-
Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Chemical Senses. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0379-864X .- 1464-3553. ; 46
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0–100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19−; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19− groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: −82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19−: −59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0–10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
