No abstract

Background Cancer patients are at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19. However, safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients undergoing treatment is unclear. Patients and Methods In this interventional prospective multi-cohort study, priming and booster doses of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine were administered 21 days apart to solid tumor patients receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted- or hormonal therapy, and patients with a hematologic malignancy receiving rituximab or after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Vaccine safety and efficacy (until three months post-booster) were assessed. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody levels were followed over time (until 28 days post-booster) and in vitro SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralization titers (NT50) towards the wild-type Wuhan strain were analyzed 28 days post-booster. Results Local and systemic adverse events (AEs) were mostly mild to moderate (only 1-3% of patients experiencing severe AEs). Local, but not systemic, AEs occurred more frequently after booster dose. 28 days post-booster vaccination of 197 cancer patients, RBD-binding antibody titers and NT50 were lower in the chemotherapy group (234.05IU/mL [95%CI 122.10-448.66] and NT50 of 24.54 [95% CI 14.50-41.52]) compared to healthy individuals (1844.93IU/mL [95% CI 1383.57-2460.14] and NT50 of 122.63 [95% CI 76.85-195.67]), irrespective of timing of vaccination during chemotherapy cycles. Extremely low antibody responses were seen in hematology patients receiving rituximab, only two patients had RBD-binding antibody titers necessary for 50% protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (<200IU/mL) and only one had NT50 above the limit of detection. During the study period, five cancer patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, including a case of severe COVID-19 in a patient receiving rituximab, resulting in a 2-week hospital admission. conclusion The BNT162b2 vaccine is well-tolerated in cancer patients under active treatment. However, the antibody response of immunized cancer patients was delayed and diminished, mainly in patients receiving chemotherapy or rituximab, resulting in breakthrough infections.

Genetically modified plants, in the following referred to as genetically modified organisms or GMOs, have been commercially grown for almost two decades. In 2010 approximately 10% of the total global crop acreage was planted with GMOs (James, 2011). More than 30 countries have been growing commercial GMOs, and many more have performed field trials. Although the majority of commercial GMOs both in terms of acreage and specific events belong to the four species: soybean, maize, cotton and rapeseed, there are another 20+ species where GMOs are commercialized or in the pipeline for commercialization. The number of GMOs cultivated in field trials or for commercial production has constantly increased during this time period. So have the number of species, the number of countries involved, the diversity of novel (added) genetic elements and the global trade. All of these factors contribute to the increasing complexity of detecting and correctly identifying GMO derived material. Many jurisdictions, including the European Union (EU), legally distinguish between authorized (and therefore legal) and un-authorized (and therefore illegal) GMOs. Information about the developments, field trials, authorizations, cultivation, trade and observations made in the official GMO control laboratories in different countries around the world is often limited, despite several attempts such as the OECD BioTrack for voluntary dissemination of data. This lack of information inevitably makes it challenging to detect and identify GMOs, especially the un-authorized GMOs. The present paper reviews the state of the art technologies and approaches in light of coverage, practicability, sensitivity and limitations. Emphasis is put on exemplifying practical detection of un-authorized GMOs. Although this paper has a European (EU) bias when examples are given, the contents have global relevance.

Protein changes induced by salinity stress were investigated in the roots of the salt-sensitive rice cultivar Taichung native 1. We found eight proteins to be induced and obtained partia1 sequences of one with a molecular mass of 15 kilodaltons and an isoelectric point of 5.5. Using an oligonucleotide probe based on this information, a cDNA clone, sa/T, was selected and found to contain an open reading frame coding for a protein of 145 amino acid residues. sa/T mRNA accumulates very rapidly in sheaths and roots from mature plants and seedlings upon treatment with Murashige and Skoog salts (1%0), air drying, abscisic acid (20 pM), polyethylene glycol (5%), sodium chloride (l%), and potassium chloride (1%). Generally, no induction was seen in the leaf lamina even when the stress should affect all parts of the plant uniformly. The organ-specific response of sa/T is correlatable with the pattern of Na+ accumulation during salt stress.