H poor pregnancy outcomes [20]. In conclusion, despite low vaccine coverage, incidence

September 1, 2017

H poor pregnancy outcomes [20]. In conclusion, despite low vaccine coverage, incidence of pandemic flu was very low in this cohort of pregnant women. No effect on pregnancy and delivery outcomes was evidenced after vaccination. However, seroprotection rate at delivery appeared lower than expected in vaccinated women.AcknowledgmentsRole of the Sponsor The sponsor of this study did not impose any impediment on the publication of the study’s results. Drs Launay and Avasimibe Goffinet prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the content of the manuscript and to the conduct of the study; the analysis and interpretation of the data; and the preparation of the manuscript. DrLaunay had final responsibility for the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Independent Statistical Analysis The statistical analysis of the data was conducted independently from the sponsor by co-authors, Carolyn Avenell and Thibaud Andrieu from the Inserm U953. C. Avenell and T. Andrieu had access to all of the data used in the study and ran the analysis. Additional Contributions We thank the study participants and the participating clinicians at each site, and Francis Beauvais (MD, PhD) for his help in preparing the manuscript. Inserm COFLUPREG Study Group members O. Launay, P. Loulergue, V. Truster, C. Villeret, M. CervantesGonzales (Centre d’Investigation Clinique de vaccinologie Cochin Pasteur, Hopital Cochin), F. Goffinet, V. Tsatsaris, C. Le Ray, D. Cabrol ^ (Maternite Port-Royal, Hopital Cochin),C. Charlier, M. Lecuit, O. ?^ Lortholary (Service de maladies infectieuses, Hopital Necker Enfants ^ Malades), Y. Ville, S. Parat (Maternite Necker-Brune, Hopital Necker?^ Enfants Malades), J. Lepercq, C. Francoual (Maternite, Hopital Saint ?^ Vincent de Paul), PH. Jarreau (service de neonatalogie, Hopital Cochin), F. ?^ Rozenberg, A Krivine (service de virologie, Hopital Cochin), M. Leruez^ Ville (service de virologie, Hopital Cochin), S. van der Werf (CNR grippe, ^ Institut Pasteur), JM Treluyer (service de pharmacologie, Hopital Cochin), ?^ F Batteux (service d’immunologie biologique, Hopital Cochin), ML ^ Gougeon (Unite ?Immunite virale, biotherapie et vaccins ? Institut ???Pasteur).Author ContributionsConceived and designed the experiments: OL CC V. Tsatsaris YV JMT FG. Performed the experiments: AK V. Truster V. Tsatsaris JL YV FR FA FG. Analyzed the data: OL AK CA TA FG. Contributed reagents/ materials/analysis tools: AK V. Truster FA. Wrote the paper: OL AK CA TA FG.Pandemic Influenza 2009 Vaccine and Pregnancy
The cAMP binding domain (CBD) is an ancient regulatory module found throughout order SPDP multiple proteins with diverse functions [1?]. For example, in prokaryotes, a CBD is present in the transcription factor, catabolite activator protein (CAP) [4,5]. In eukaryotes, CBDs are found in Protein Kinase A and G [1,2,6?18], in transport proteins, hyperpolarization activated and cyclicnucleotide modulated (HCN) channels [19,20], as well as in the guanine nucleotide exchange factors, EPAC (Fig. 1) [3,10,21?8]. Although, these aforementioned proteins are functionally diverse, the embedded CBD(s) play a similar allosteric role ?regulation by means of auto-inhibition [29,30], i.e. the CBDs maintain a state of inactivity in the absence of the endogenous agonist, cyclic-AMP (cAMP) [22,23,25,27,31,32]. Binding of cAMP acts by releasing the inhibition exerted 12926553 by the auto-inhibiting determinants of the CBDs. The CBDs are typically characterized by an.H poor pregnancy outcomes [20]. In conclusion, despite low vaccine coverage, incidence of pandemic flu was very low in this cohort of pregnant women. No effect on pregnancy and delivery outcomes was evidenced after vaccination. However, seroprotection rate at delivery appeared lower than expected in vaccinated women.AcknowledgmentsRole of the Sponsor The sponsor of this study did not impose any impediment on the publication of the study’s results. Drs Launay and Goffinet prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the content of the manuscript and to the conduct of the study; the analysis and interpretation of the data; and the preparation of the manuscript. DrLaunay had final responsibility for the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Independent Statistical Analysis The statistical analysis of the data was conducted independently from the sponsor by co-authors, Carolyn Avenell and Thibaud Andrieu from the Inserm U953. C. Avenell and T. Andrieu had access to all of the data used in the study and ran the analysis. Additional Contributions We thank the study participants and the participating clinicians at each site, and Francis Beauvais (MD, PhD) for his help in preparing the manuscript. Inserm COFLUPREG Study Group members O. Launay, P. Loulergue, V. Truster, C. Villeret, M. CervantesGonzales (Centre d’Investigation Clinique de vaccinologie Cochin Pasteur, Hopital Cochin), F. Goffinet, V. Tsatsaris, C. Le Ray, D. Cabrol ^ (Maternite Port-Royal, Hopital Cochin),C. Charlier, M. Lecuit, O. ?^ Lortholary (Service de maladies infectieuses, Hopital Necker Enfants ^ Malades), Y. Ville, S. Parat (Maternite Necker-Brune, Hopital Necker?^ Enfants Malades), J. Lepercq, C. Francoual (Maternite, Hopital Saint ?^ Vincent de Paul), PH. Jarreau (service de neonatalogie, Hopital Cochin), F. ?^ Rozenberg, A Krivine (service de virologie, Hopital Cochin), M. Leruez^ Ville (service de virologie, Hopital Cochin), S. van der Werf (CNR grippe, ^ Institut Pasteur), JM Treluyer (service de pharmacologie, Hopital Cochin), ?^ F Batteux (service d’immunologie biologique, Hopital Cochin), ML ^ Gougeon (Unite ?Immunite virale, biotherapie et vaccins ? Institut ???Pasteur).Author ContributionsConceived and designed the experiments: OL CC V. Tsatsaris YV JMT FG. Performed the experiments: AK V. Truster V. Tsatsaris JL YV FR FA FG. Analyzed the data: OL AK CA TA FG. Contributed reagents/ materials/analysis tools: AK V. Truster FA. Wrote the paper: OL AK CA TA FG.Pandemic Influenza 2009 Vaccine and Pregnancy
The cAMP binding domain (CBD) is an ancient regulatory module found throughout multiple proteins with diverse functions [1?]. For example, in prokaryotes, a CBD is present in the transcription factor, catabolite activator protein (CAP) [4,5]. In eukaryotes, CBDs are found in Protein Kinase A and G [1,2,6?18], in transport proteins, hyperpolarization activated and cyclicnucleotide modulated (HCN) channels [19,20], as well as in the guanine nucleotide exchange factors, EPAC (Fig. 1) [3,10,21?8]. Although, these aforementioned proteins are functionally diverse, the embedded CBD(s) play a similar allosteric role ?regulation by means of auto-inhibition [29,30], i.e. the CBDs maintain a state of inactivity in the absence of the endogenous agonist, cyclic-AMP (cAMP) [22,23,25,27,31,32]. Binding of cAMP acts by releasing the inhibition exerted 12926553 by the auto-inhibiting determinants of the CBDs. The CBDs are typically characterized by an.