Search

BackgroundIt is unknown if early COVID-19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy can reduce risk of Long COVID. The mAbs amubarvimab/romlusevimab were previously demonstrated to reduce risk of hospitalization/death by 79%. This study assessed the impact of amubarvimab/romlusevimab on late outcomes, including Long COVID.MethodsNon-hospitalized high-risk adults within 10 days of COVID-19 symptom onset enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial of amubarvimab/romlusevimab for COVID-19 treatment. Late symptoms, assessed using a participant-completed symptom diary, were a pre-specified exploratory endpoint. The primary outcome for this analysis was the composite of Long COVID by participant self-report (presence of COVID-19 symptoms as recorded in the diary at week 36) or hospitalization or death by week 36. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to address incomplete outcome ascertainment, giving weighted risk ratios (wRR) comparing amubarvimab/romlusevimab to placebo.FindingsParticipants received amubarvimab/romlusevimab (n = 390) or placebo (n = 390) between January and July 2021. Median age was 49 years, 52% were female, 18% Black/African American, 49% Hispanic/Latino, and 9% COVID-19-vaccinated at entry. At week 36, 103 (13%) had incomplete outcome ascertainment, and 66 (17%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 92 (24%) on placebo met the primary outcome (wRR = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.93). The difference was driven by fewer hospitalizations/deaths with amubarvimab/romlusevimab (4%) than placebo (13%). Among 652 participants with available diary responses, 53 (16%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 44 (14%) on placebo reported presence of Long COVID.InterpretationAmubarvimab/romlusevimab treatment, while highly effective in preventing hospitalizations/deaths, did not reduce risk of Long COVID. Additional interventions are needed to prevent Long COVID.FundingNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab supplied by Brii Biosciences.

The current structure of formal education makes it difficult for teachers and students to hold meaningful conversations to support high-school youth's meaning-making of critical social-justice issues. This paper presents data on three high-school youth's knowledge and experiences with social justice issues during the pandemic. Specifically, the paper aims to explore how youth construct knowledge and counter dominant discourses through utilizing informal learning spaces, such as social media platforms, peer and family conversations, as well as personal encounters. In addition, and more importantly, an exploration of how formal education can incorporate social-justice issues into the curriculum is considered. The analysis of these high school youth's interview conversations presents their diverging needs to learn about social-justice topics in both formal and informal learning contexts. The data also illustrates the power of their voices in a way that could inform future curriculum development. Discussions and implications highlight the possibility of creating such ethical spaces in formal education to engage in social-justice topics.

Emergent scholarly studies on the use of social network sites (SNSs) in higher education have focused mainly on how SNSs could enhance effective teaching and learning. However, very few studies have explored how social relationships between teachers and learners could serve as a learner-centered approach to promote teaching and learning through SNSs. To address this gap, the current study gathered and analyzed qualitative data from 27 teachers and 51 students in a public university in South Africa. The findings show how the outcomes of the use of SNSs in the university are also linked to learner-centered approaches which include: the development of the knowledge, skills, and attributes of students required for the twenty-first century; students' demonstration of good social skills, teamwork, individual self-esteem, and confidence; and empowering students through their scholarly voices in the social network environment. To the teachers, the use of SNSs enhances their relational skills, enables them to be innovative in the use of digital technology, and allows them to create new pedagogical approaches. The study also reveals that when teachers interact and share knowledge with students in the social network environment, they serve the learning needs of all students, including those from low socio-economic backgrounds and first-generation students, through leaner-centered approaches. This paper adds to the literature on social constructivism by highlighting how the development of good social relationships between teachers and learners through what the authors term as digital relational pedagogies could serve as a learner-centered approach to effective teaching and learning, especially when facilitated by SNSs.

Tumors frequently display high chromosomal instability and contain multiple copies of genomic regions. Here, we describe Gain Route Identification and Timing In Cancer (GRITIC), a generic method for timing genomic gains leading to complex copy number states, using single-sample bulk whole-genome sequencing data. By applying GRITIC to 6,091 tumors, we found that non-parsimonious evolution is frequent in the formation of complex copy number states in genome-doubled tumors. We measured chromosomal instability before and after genome duplication in human tumors and found that late genome doubling was followed by an increase in the rate of copy number gain. Copy number gains often accumulate as punctuated bursts, commonly after genome doubling. We infer that genome duplications typically affect the landscape of copy number losses, while only minimally impacting copy number gains. In summary, GRITIC is a novel copy number gain timing framework that permits the analysis of copy number evolution in chromosomally unstable tumors. Significance: Complex genomic gains are associated with whole-genome duplications, which are frequent across tumors, span a large fraction of their genomes, and are linked to poorer outcomes. GRITIC infers when these gains occur during tumor development, which will help to identify the genetic events that drive tumor evolution. See related commentary by Taylor, p. 1766.

Introduction: As fentanyl has become more readily available, opioid-related morbidity and mortality in the United States has increased dramatically. Preliminary studies suggest that high-affinity, partial mu-opioid receptor agonists such as the combination product buprenorphine-naloxone may reduce mortality from overdose and promote remission. With the escalating prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD), it is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of opioid agonists like buprenorphine-naloxone. This study examines mortality and remission rates for OUD patients prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone to determine the efficacy of this treatment toward these outcomes.Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis using the US Collaborative Network database in TriNetX, examining de-identified medical records from nearly 92 million patients across 56 healthcare organizations. The study spanned the years from January 1, 2017–May 13, 2022. Cohort 1 included OUD patients who began buprenorphine-naloxone treatment within one-year post-diagnosis, while Cohort 2, the control group, consisted of OUD patients who were not administered buprenorphine. The study measured mortality and remission rates within a year of the index event, incorporating propensity score matching for age, gender, and race/ethnicity.Results: Prior to propensity matching, we identified a total of 221,967 patients with OUD. Following exclusions, 61,656 patients treated with buprenorphine-naloxone showed 34% fewer deaths within one year of diagnosis compared to 159,061 patients who did not receive buprenorphine (2.6% vs 4.0%; relative risk [RR] 0.661; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.627–0.698; P < 0.001). The remission rate was approximately 1.9 times higher in the buprenorphine-naloxone group compared to the control group (18.8% vs 10.1%; RR 1.862; 95% CI 1.812–1.914; P < 0.001). After propensity matching, the effect on mortality decreased but remained statistically significant (2.6% vs 3.0%; RR 0.868; 95% CI 0.813–0.927; P < 0.001) and the remission rate remained consistent (18.8% vs 10.4%; RR 1.812; 95% CI 1.750–1.876; P < 0.001). Number needed to treat for benefit was 249 for death and 12 for remission.Conclusion: Buprenorphine-naloxone was associated with significantly reduced mortality and increased remission rates for patients with opioid use disorder and should be used as a primary treatment. The recognition and implementation of treatment options like buprenorphine-naloxone is vital in alleviating the impact of OUD.