scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Peter Reynolds

Bio: Peter Reynolds is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Technology forecasting. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 3 publications receiving 5 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, baricitinib significantly reduced the risk of death but the size of benefit was somewhat smaller than that suggested by previous trials.

95 citations

ReportDOI
01 Jul 2012
TL;DR: The Mechanochemical Transduction Convergence Workshop as mentioned in this paper was a test case for identifying potential confluences or convergences of individual science and engineering fields and then project how those convergence may lead to new capabilities.
Abstract: : While the rapid pace of science and technology (S&T) in the modern world is enabling new capabilities for the Army, the globalization of information, research, and economies poses new challenges for the Department of Defense (DoD) to stay at the cutting edge of S&T research and avoid technological surprise. Previous approaches to forecasting S&T abilities of future allies and adversaries, and to predicting corresponding changes required for Army strategy have had limited success. A method for more accurately predicting the emergence of future scientific discoveries and applications would be instrumental for improving the effectiveness of DoD S&T programs. Recent studies have suggested a more successful forecasting approach: Identify potential confluences or convergences of individual science and engineering fields and then project how those convergences may lead to new capabilities. One recently emerged convergence is between the fields of chemistry and materials science. This revolutionary new field, called mechanochemical transduction, focuses on understanding and harnessing the fundamental processes through which mechanical stress can lead to a pre-designed chemical reaction. In January 2012, the Army Research Office (ARO) sponsored the Mechanochemical Transduction Convergence Workshop as a test case for identifying convergences of disciplines and their potential impact on science and the Army. A diverse group of academic and government scientists were invited to participate in the workshop. The academic researchers were renowned subject matter experts representing a wide range of disciplines, including chemical engineering, organic chemistry, physical organic chemistry, molecular biochemistry, materials engineering, multi-scale theory, metallurgy, and physics. The chief objective of workshop was to identify the most promising research opportunities and interdisciplinary convergences that could lead the field of mechanochemical transduction in new directions.

1 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
04 Sep 2020-BMJ
TL;DR: A standing international panel of content experts, patients, clinicians, and methodologists, free from relevant conflicts of interest, produce recommendations for clinical practice, containing a strong recommendation for systemic corticosteroids in patients with severe and critical covid-19, and a weak or conditional recommendation against systemic cortiosteroids for non-severe patients.
Abstract: Clinical question What is the role of drug interventions in the treatment of patients with covid-19? New recommendation Increased attention on ivermectin as a potential treatment for covid-19 triggered this recommendation. The panel made a recommendation against ivermectin in patients with covid-19 regardless of disease severity, except in the context of a clinical trial. Prior recommendations (a) a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine in patients with covid-19, regardless of disease severity; (b) a strong recommendation against the use of lopinavir-ritonavir in patients with covid-19, regardless of disease severity; (c) a strong recommendation for systemic corticosteroids in patients with severe and critical covid-19; (d) a conditional recommendation against systemic corticosteroids in patients with non-severe covid-19, and (e) a conditional recommendation against remdesivir in hospitalised patients with covid-19. How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development group (GDG) of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation There is insufficient evidence to be clear to what extent, if any, ivermectin is helpful or harmful in treating covid-19. There was a large degree of uncertainty in the evidence about ivermectin on mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for hospital admission, time to clinical improvement, and other patient-important outcomes. There is potential for harm with an increased risk of adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation. Applying pre-determined values and preferences, the panel inferred that almost all well informed patients would want to receive ivermectin only in the context of a randomised trial, given that the evidence left a very high degree of uncertainty on important effects. Updates This is a living guideline. It replaces earlier versions (4 September, 20 November, and 17 December 2020) and supersedes the BMJ Rapid Recommendations on remdesivir published on 2 July 2020. The previous versions can be found as data supplements. New recommendations will be published as updates to this guideline. Readers note This is the fourth version (update 3) of the living guideline (BMJ 2020;370:m3379). When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.

660 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
30 Jul 2020-BMJ
TL;DR: Glucocorticoids probably reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with covid-19 compared with standard care and the effectiveness of most interventions is uncertain because most of the randomised controlled trials so far have been small and have important study limitations.
Abstract: Objective To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Design Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. Study selection Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. Methods After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. Results 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. Conclusion Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. Systematic review registration This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.

602 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a task force from the European Respiratory Society and endorsed by the Chinese Thoracic Society identified priority interventions for the initial version of this "living guideline" using PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection have a high mortality rate and frequently require noninvasive respiratory support or invasive ventilation. Optimising and standardising management through evidence-based guidelines may improve quality of care and therefore patient outcomes. METHODS: A task force from the European Respiratory Society and endorsed by the Chinese Thoracic Society identified priority interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for the initial version of this "living guideline" using the PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format. The GRADE approach was used for assessing the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Systematic literature reviews were performed, and data pooled by meta-analysis where possible. Evidence tables were presented and evidence to decision frameworks were used to formulate recommendations. RESULTS: Based on the available evidence at the time of guideline development (20 February, 2021), the panel makes a strong recommendation in favour of the use of systemic corticosteroids in patients requiring supplementary oxygen or ventilatory support, and for the use of anticoagulation in hospitalised patients. The panel makes a conditional recommendation for interleukin (IL)-6 receptor antagonist monoclonal antibody treatment and high-flow nasal oxygen or continuous positive airway pressure in patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. The panel make strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir. Conditional recommendations are made against the use of azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin, colchicine, and remdesivir, in the latter case specifically in patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. No recommendation was made for remdesivir in patients requiring supplemental oxygen. Further recommendations for research are made. CONCLUSION: The evidence base for management of COVID-19 now supports strong recommendations in favour and against specific interventions. These guidelines will be regularly updated as further evidence becomes available.

147 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Baricitinib is a Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor with known anti-inflammatory and anti-viral properties as discussed by the authors , which has been shown to reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19.

40 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Acute COVID-19 correlates with biomarkers of systemic inflammation, hypercoagulability, and comorbidities that are less prominent in PASC, and female sex at birth is associated with reduced risk for acute CO VID-19 progression, but with increased risk of PASC.
Abstract: SARS-CoV-2–infected individuals may suffer a multi–organ system disorder known as “long COVID” or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). There are no standard treatments, the pathophysiology is unknown, and incidence varies by clinical phenotype. Acute COVID-19 correlates with biomarkers of systemic inflammation, hypercoagulability, and comorbidities that are less prominent in PASC. Macrovessel thrombosis, a hallmark of acute COVID-19, is less frequent in PASC. Female sex at birth is associated with reduced risk for acute COVID-19 progression, but with increased risk of PASC. Persistent microvascular endotheliopathy associated with cryptic SARS-CoV-2 tissue reservoirs has been implicated in PASC pathology. Autoantibodies, localized inflammation, and reactivation of latent pathogens may also be involved, potentially leading to microvascular thrombosis, as documented in multiple PASC tissues. Diagnostic assays illuminating possible therapeutic targets are discussed.

37 citations