Explore the vast range of titles available.

Nature Immunology’s 20 th anniversary is a good opportunity to reminisce about the ImmGen collective endeavor — its goals, successes and horror stories — and the group’s exploration of various modes of scientific publishing.

ObjectiveColorectal cancer screening programmes are implemented worldwide; many are based on faecal immunochemical testing (FIT). The aim of this study was to evaluate two frequently used FITs on participation, usability, positivity rate and diagnostic yield in population-based FIT screening.DesignComparison of two FITs was performed in a fourth round population-based FIT-screening cohort. Randomly selected individuals aged 50–74 were invited for FIT screening and were randomly allocated to receive an OC -Sensor (Eiken, Japan) or faecal occult blood (FOB)-Gold (Sentinel, Italy) test (March–December 2014). A cut-off of 10 µg haemoglobin (Hb)/g faeces (ie, 50 ng Hb/mL buffer for OC-Sensor and 59 ng Hb for FOB-Gold) was used for both FITs.ResultsIn total, 19 291 eligible invitees were included (median age 61, IQR 57–67; 48% males): 9669 invitees received OC-Sensor and 9622 FOB-Gold; both tests were returned by 63% of invitees (p=0.96). Tests were non-analysable in 0.7% of participants using OC-Sensor vs 2.0% using FOB-Gold (p<0.001). Positivity rate was 7.9% for OC-Sensor, and 6.5% for FOB-Gold (p=0.002). There was no significant difference in diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia (1.4% for OC-Sensor vs 1.2% for FOB-Gold; p=0.15) or positive predictive value (PPV; 31% vs 32%; p=0.80). When comparing both tests at the same positivity rate instead of cut-off, they yielded similar PPV and detection rates.ConclusionsThe OC-Sensor and FOB-Gold were equally acceptable to a screening population. However, FOB-Gold was prone to more non-analysable tests. Comparison between FIT brands is usually done at the same Hb stool concentration. Our findings imply that for a fair comparison on diagnostic yield between FIT's positivity rate rather than Hb concentration should be used.Trial registration numberNTR5385; Results.

Crassostrea virginica is a well-established bivalve species for biomonitoring persistent organic pollutants such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in aquatic environments. Differing biomonitoring methods employing either wild oysters inhabiting sites of interest or naïve cultured oysters deployed to sites for extended periods can be used for site evaluations. However, important differences in total contaminant concentrations accumulated have been observed between the wild and transplanted groups. Furthermore, although rearing cultured triploid oysters is widely popular in commercial farming, the difference in contaminant bioaccumulation potential between triploid and diploid cultured oysters is vastly understudied, particularly for organic contaminants such as PAH. This study explores differences in PAH kinetics between transplanted triploid and diploid cultured oysters and wild oysters at a PAH-impacted site during a 6-week field exposure study using novel immunological techniques: antibody-based biosensor technology and immunofluorescence visualization. Conventional chemical analysis of oyster tissue was also conducted for comparison. While differences were observed in the oyster interstitial fluid between the wild and transplanted oysters throughout the study, whole tissue analysis revealed differing trends at each time point. Our findings suggest that insufficient equilibration time may contribute to the differences observed between groups. Furthermore, when combined with visual evidence via immunofluorescence, internal partitioning of contaminants may be an important determinant for total concentrations measured. A better understanding of the differences observed between wild and transplanted oyster groups is necessary for improved biomonitoring. Our study highlights the value in employing novel immunological techniques to explore possible mechanisms driving these differences.

Quick reference title that discusses infectious health risks and prevention measures; non-infectous risks; illness upon return; WHO recommendations.

Background The measurement method for experimental resolution and related data to evaluate analytical performance is poorly explored in clinical research. We established a method to measure the experimental resolution of clinical tests, including biochemical tests, automatic hematology analyzer methods, immunoassays, chemical experiments, and qPCR, to evaluate their analytical performance. Methods Serially diluted samples in equal proportions were measured, and correlation analysis was performed between the relative concentration and the measured value. Results were accepted for p ≤ 0.01 of the correlation coefficient. The minimum concentration gradient (eg, 10%) was defined as the experimental resolution. For this method, the smaller the value, the higher the experimental resolution and the better the analytical performance. Results The experimental resolution of the most common biochemical indices reached 10%, with some even reaching 1%. The results of most counting experiments showed experimental resolution up to 10%, whereas the experimental resolution of the classical chemical assays reached 1%. Unexpectedly, the experimental resolution of more sensitive assays, such as immunoassays was only 25% when using the manual method and 10% for qPCR. Conclusion This study established a method for measuring the experimental resolution of laboratory assays and provides a new index for evaluating the reliability of methods in clinical laboratories. The experimental resolution of most common biochemical indexes reached 10%, and the experimental resolution of some indexes reached 1%. The results of counting experiments showed that, in most cases, the experimental resolution was up to 10%. The experimental resolution of classical chemical assays reached 1%. Unexpectedly, the experimental resolution of assays generally considered to be more sensitive, such as immunoassays and qPCR, was only 25% using the manual method and 10% by qPCR.

One of the major concerns in the practice of allergy is related to the safety of procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic disease. Management (diagnosis and treatment) of hypersensitivity disorders involves often intentional exposure to potentially allergenic substances (during skin testing), deliberate induction in the office of allergic symptoms to offending compounds (provocation tests) or intentional application of potentially dangerous substances (allergy vaccine) to sensitized patients. These situations may be associated with a significant risk of unwanted, excessive or even dangerous reactions, which in many instances cannot be completely avoided. However, adverse reactions can be minimized or even avoided if a physician is fully aware of potential risk and is prepared to appropriately handle the situation. Information on the risk of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergic diseases has been accumulated in the medical literature for decades; however, except for allergen specific immunotherapy, it has never been presented in a systematic fashion. Up to now no single document addressed the risk of the most commonly used medical procedures in the allergy office nor attempted to present general requirements necessary to assure the safety of these procedures. Following review of available literature a group of allergy experts within the World Allergy Organization (WAO), representing various continents and areas of allergy expertise, presents this report on risk associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology and proposes a consensus on safety requirements for performing procedures in allergy offices. Optimal safety measures including appropriate location, type and required time of supervision, availability of safety equipment, access to specialized emergency services, etc. for various procedures have been recommended. This document should be useful for allergists with already established practices and experience as well as to other specialists taking care of patients with allergies.

Scientists fear that security-driven switch to X-ray irradiators will harm their research.

Substance use disorders are a widely recognized problem, which affects various levels of communities and influenced the world socioeconomically. Its source is deeply embedded in the global population. In order to fight against such an adversary, governments have spared no efforts in implementing substance abuse treatment centers and funding research to develop treatments and prevention procedures. In this review, we will discuss the use of immunological-based treatments and detection kit technologies. We will be detailing the steps followed to produce performant antibodies (antigens, carriers, and adjuvants) focusing on cocaine and methamphetamine as examples. Furthermore, part of this review is dedicated to substance use detection. Owing to novel technologies such as bio-functional polymeric surfaces and biosensors manufacturing, detection has become a more convenient method with the fast and on-site developed devices. Commercially available devices are able to test substance use disorders in urine, saliva, hair, and sweat. This improvement has had a tremendous impact on the prevention of driving under influence and other illicit behaviors. Lastly, substance abuse became a major issue involving the cooperation of experts on all levels to devise better treatment programs and prevent abuse-based accidents, injury and death. [Display omitted] •Different methods are used for substance use detection, prevention and treatment.•Antibody based-methods are wildly used and implicated in different aspects.•Novel technologies, as of now, are on the rise and proved their potential.•Particle-based detection modules are a great addition to substance use combat.•On-site detection is a great approach yet needs time to be fully integrated.

Modern threats of bioterrorism force the need to develop methods for rapid and accurate identification of dangerous biological agents. Currently, there are many types of methods used in this field of studies that are based on immunological or genetic techniques, or constitute a combination of both methods (immuno-genetic). There are also methods that have been developed on the basis of physical and chemical properties of the analytes. Each group of these analytical assays can be further divided into conventional methods (e.g. simple antigen-antibody reactions, classical PCR, real-time PCR), and modern technologies (e.g. microarray technology, aptamers, phosphors, etc.). Nanodiagnostics constitute another group of methods that utilize the objects at a nanoscale (below 100 nm). There are also integrated and automated diagnostic systems, which combine different methods and allow simultaneous sampling, extraction of genetic material and detection and identification of the analyte using genetic, as well as immunological techniques.

Despite rapid developments in single cell sequencing, sample-specific batch effects, detection of cell multiplets, and experimental costs remain outstanding challenges. Here, we introduce Cell Hashing, where oligo-tagged antibodies against ubiquitously expressed surface proteins uniquely label cells from distinct samples, which can be subsequently pooled. By sequencing these tags alongside the cellular transcriptome, we can assign each cell to its original sample, robustly identify cross-sample multiplets, and “super-load” commercial droplet-based systems for significant cost reduction. We validate our approach using a complementary genetic approach and demonstrate how hashing can generalize the benefits of single cell multiplexing to diverse samples and experimental designs.