Immune response-related genes associated to blocking midgut dengue virus infection in Aedes aegypti strains that differ in susceptibility

Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti, the principal global vector of dengue viruses, has difTerences in its susceptibility to dengue virus infection. We compared the global expres? sion of genes in the midguts of Colombian Ae. aegypti dengue-susceptible (Cali-S) and dengue-refractory (Cali-MIB) field derived strains after ingesting either a sugarmeal, a bloodmeal, or a bloodmeal containing dengue virus serotype 2 (DENV-2). Microarraybased transcriptome analysis among treatments indicated a total of 4725 transcripts with differential expression between the two strains. Eleven genes were selected from different functional groups based on their significant up or down expression levels as well as reports in the literature suggesting they are associated with dengue virus elimination. We measured mRNA abundance of these 11 genes at 0, 8, 24, and 36 h postinfection using quantitative real time PCR (qPCR) to confirm the microarray results and assess any temporal patterns. Four genes were selected (Gram-negative binding protein—GNBP [AAEL009176], Niemann Pick Type-C2一NPC2 [AAEL015136], Keratinocyte lectin [AAEL009842], and Cathepsin-b [AAEL007585]) for knockdown experiments using RNA interference (RNAi) methodology to determine the phenotype (DENV-2 susceptible or refractory). Silencing GNBP、Cathepsin-b and Keratinocyte lectin reduced the percentage of mosquitoes with disseminated virus in the Cali-S strain to 8%, 20%, and 12% respectively compared with 96% in the controls. Sile ncing of NPC2 increased the percentage of mosquitos with disseminated virus infections in Cali-MIB to 66% compared with 35% in the controls. This study provides in sight into genes that may contribute to the Cali-S susceptible and Cali-MIB refractory phenotypes in 昇匕 aegypti.

Universities as catalysts of social innovation in health systems in low-and middle-income countries: a multi-country case study

Background Social innovation(SI)in health holds potential to contribute to health systems strengthening and universal health coverage(UHC).The role of universities in SI has been well described in the context of high-income countries.An evidence gap exits on SI in healthcare delivery in the context of low-and middle-income countries(LMICs)as well as on the engagement of universities from these contexts.There is thus a need to build capacity for research and engagement in SI in healthcare delivery within these universities.The aim of this study was to examine the adoption and implementation of network of university hubs focused on SI in healthcare delivery within five countries across Africa,Asia and Latin America.The objectives were to describe the model,components and implementation process of the hubs;identify the enablers and barriers experienced and draw implications that could be relevant to other LMIC universities interested in SI.Methods A case study design was adopted to study the implementation process of a network of university hubs.Data from documentation,team discussions and post-implementation surveys were collected from 2013 to 2018 and analysed with aid of a modified policy analysis framework.Results/discussion SI university-based hubs serve as cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral platforms,established to catalyse SI within the local health system through four core activities:research,community-building,storytelling and institutional embedding,and adhering to values of inclusion,assets,co-creation and hope.Hubs were implemented as informal structures,managed by a small core team,in existing department.Enablers of hub implementation and functioning were the availability of strong in-country social networks,legitimacy attained from being part of a global network on SI in health and receiving a capacity building package in the initial stages.Barriers encountered were internal institutional resistance,administrative challenges associated with university bureaucracy and annual funding cycles.Conclusions This case study shows the opportunity that reside within LMIC universities to act as eco-system enablers of SI in healthcare delivery in order to fill the evidence gap on SI and enhance cross-sectoral participation in support of achieving UHC.

Documentary research on social innovation in health in Latin America

Background:Identifying social innovation in health initiatives,promoting quality of life through them,and transforming current health conditions demand the knowledge,comprehension and appropriation of the theoretical and methodological developments of this concept Academic developments in social innovation have mainly occurred in and been documented for English-speaking countries,although relevant experiences have been implemented in Latin America.In this article,we describe and analyze how social innovation in health is being approached and understood in this region.Main text:To identify the theoretical and methodological developments of social innovation in health between 2013 and 2018,a scoping review with a mixed approach was carried out.Eighty texts in English,Spanish and Portuguese were selected for a process of reflexive analysis of intra and intertextual reading.The approaches identified in the studied initiatives were complementary.The most applied approaches were innovation in health,technological innovation in health and social innovation,each with twelve publications,and social innovation in health and ecohealth with ten and seven publications respectively.The approaches showed a general interest in reaching the goals of the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs),the Alma Ata Declaration and the Ottawa Letter.Conclusions:The social innovation in health approach in Latin America adopts educational strategies,identifies risk factors,optimizes resources,promotes interculturality,participation,community empowerment,and enhances intersectorality and interdisciplinarity.As an approach,process,program or solution,social innovation in health is a conceptual category under construction.This research provides a baseline for other systematic reviews on the subject.