Search

Collective Self-Organized (CSO) Housing (referring to both renovation of existing stock and construction of new dwellings, with the definitive influence of the residents) has become the center of attention of public authorities and private businesses alike, the main reason being that it is often considered a good solution to open up new market segments in the post-crisis housing market for all stakeholders involved. Many of these CSO Housing projects seem to strengthen the commitment of residents to their own built environment. They furthermore contribute to the development of precisely the kind of housing that meets the requirements of the involved clients. This way, the emerging tendency of collective participation of end users in their future built environment contributes to a more accepted, sustainable, green and social environment for many residents to live. The applicability of CSO Housing solutions is strongly dependent on many factors. First and foremost, new CSO Housing constructions and CSO Housing retrofitting differ substantially everywhere, occupying a different market segment and having a different market potential. Similarly, the institutional and legislative background of different European Member states, as well as the residential values and economic possibilities, the availability of land and its price, up to the attitude of public authorities strongly influence the market potential of CSO Housing development. Based on a set of key determinants the following paper plans to map out and show the market potential of different CSO Housing projects in some European countries. The paper furthermore identifies opportunities for new business to be developed, and strategies for market players to come up with new and smart CSO Housing solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a cohort of 292 chronic hepatitis C patients living in the Benelux countries the relationship between viral genotype and geographical origin, route of transmission, clinical characteristics and severity of liver disease was analyzed. HCV-RNA isolates could be classified by the Line Probe Assay (LiPA) as 1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4 or 5 in 286 (98%) cases. Patients of European origin were predominantly infected with HCV subtype 1b (164/254, 65%, CI 58-70%), as were patients of Asian origin (7/13, 54%). Patients originating from Surinam (South America) had predominantly type 2 (9/10, 90%), whereas Africans were mainly infected with type 4 (7/9, 77%). Blood transfusion was the mode of transmission in 142 (50%) patients, intravenous drug abuse (IVDA) in 40 (14%), occupational needle accident or tattoo in 11 (4%); no obvious source of infection was found in 93 (33%). In patients infected by blood transfusion, subtype 1b was predominant (70%, CI 61-77%), whereas subtypes la and 3 were predominant in those infected by IVDA (25% and 45%, respectively, p<0.001). Cirrhosis was observed in 68 (24%) patients; in multivariate analysis, factors independently related to cirrhosis were: the duration of infection, age and prior hepatitis B. No significant relationship was found between the severity of fibrosis or liver inflammation and the HCV (sub)types. In summary, in this large cohort of patients in the Benelux countries the hepatitis C virus (sub)type present was clearly related to the country of origin and the route of transmission, but not to the severity of liver disease.

Two rapid genotyping methods for hepatitis C virus (HCV), the line probe assay (Inno-LiPA) and the subtype-specific core amplification system [Okamoto et al., (1992b) Journal of General Virology 73:673-679], were applied to 58 HCV isolates which were typed as type 1 (n = 37) and type 2 (n = 21) by sequence analysis of the 5' untranslated region (5'UTR). The line probe assay targets the 5'UTR and recognized 12 subtype 1a, 25 subtype 1b, 18 subtype 2a, 2 subtype 2b and 1 subtype 2d in accordance with sequence analysis of this region. Subtype-specific core amplification revealed 7 discrepancies among the 37 type 1 isolates when compared to LiPA. A different subtype was observed in 3 isolates (1a versus 1b), 2 isolates remained untyped and 2 isolates showed a coinfection of subtype 1a and 1b. The first 5 discrepancies were confirmed by sequence analysis of the core region whereas the coinfection could not be confirmed. Of the 21 type 2 isolates only one could be typed by subtype-specific core amplification. HCV RNA was detected in all 21 cases after the general first round of polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Direct sequencing of the core region indicated sequence variation as a source of failure. It is concluded that LiPA results are conclusive for typing of HCV. However, LiPA is hampered occasionally for subtyping by lack of subtype-specific sequence variation in 5'UTR. Subtyping results by subtype-specific core amplification were accurate. However, it seems that this assay is not suitable for the identification of genotype 2 isolates that circulate in patients living in Western Europe.