Abstract: Đánh giá hiệu quả sự thanh thải của urê trong chạy thận nhân tạo (CTNT) bằng chỉ số spKt/V là cần thiết trong điều trị bệnh nhân mắc bệnh thận mạn giai đoạn cuối (BTMGĐC), với nhiều phương pháp đánh giá sẽ giúp nhà chuyên môn lựa chọn phương án tối ưu nhất trong điều trị bệnh lý này. Nghiên cứu được thực hiện nhằm đánh giá hiệu quả CTNT bằng cách so sánh chỉ số spKt/V ở phương pháp đo trực tiếp trên máy và phương pháp tính toán theo công thức Daugridas. Nghiên cứu mô tả cắt ngang được thực hiện trên 175 bệnh nhân mắc BTMGĐC đang lọc máu tại bệnh viện Chợ Rẫy từ tháng 1-6/2022, chỉ số spKt/V được đo bằng hai phương pháp trên và tính giá trị trung bình, sử dụng kiểm định Willcoxon signrank để so sánh 2 giá trị đó. Kết quả cho thấy chỉ số trung bình spKt/V ở phương pháp đo trực tiếp trên máy (1,77 (1,5 - 2,06)) và phương pháp tính toán bằng công thức Daugridas (1,6 (1,36 - 1,82)) đều nằm trong giá trị được khuyến cáo. Kiểm định Willcoxon signrank cho thấy sự khác biệt chỉ số spKt/V ở hai phương pháp có ý nghĩa thống kê và Mô hình hồi quy tuyến tính cho thấy có sự tương quan chặt chẽ với hệ số tương quan R = 0,65 và R2 = 0,423 (p 〈 0,001). Vì vậy, nhà chuyên môn cần cân nhắc nên lựa chọn phương pháp đo trực tiếp trên máy để đánh giá và điều chỉnh các thông số trong quá trình CTNT để giúp cho bệnh nhân điều trị hiệu quả bệnh lý mắc phải này.

Abstract: Mục tiêu: Nghiên cứu tiến hành so sánh quy trình LAMP với quy trình nuôi cấy phát hiện gen độc tố của vi khuẩn Clostridium botulinum (C. botulinum) type A, B. Đối tượng và phương pháp nghiên cứu: Nghiên cứu thực nghiệm trong phòng thí nghiệm trên 90 mẫu thực phẩm và bệnh phẩm lâm sàng. Kết quả: Sử dụng kết quả của quy trình nuôi cấy phân lập phát hiện gen độc tố làm tiêu chuẩn để so sánh với quy trình LAMP. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy số mẫu cho kết quả dương tính khi thực hiện quy trình LAMP phát hiện gen độc tố type A, B của vi khuẩn C. botulinum là 12/90 (13,3%) trong khi đó quy trình nuôi cấy phân lập phát hiện gen độc tố là 11/90 (12,2%). Độ nhạy, độ đặc hiệu và độ đúng (độ chính xác) của quy trình LAMP phát hiện gen độc tố type A, B của vi khuẩn C. botulinum lần lượt là 91,6%, 100%, và 98,8%. Bên cạnh đó, tỷ lệ dương tính giả 8,33%, tỷ lệ âm tính giả 0%, đặc biệt hệ số kappa là 0,986 cho thấy mức độ đồng thuận gần như hoàn toàn giữa 2 quy trình. Ngoài ra, quy trình LAMP cho thấy nhiều ưu điểm như thời gian thực hiện nhanh hơn, tiết kiệm chi phí hơn, dễ thực hiện hơn, có thể triển khai ở tất cả các phòng xét nghiệm từ nhỏ đến lớn để phát hiện độc tố của vi khuẩn C. botulinum type A, B trong thực phẩm cũng như các mẫu bệnh phẩm lâm sàng.

Abstract: This article studies whether firm-level and country-level factors affect to the corporation's debt maturity in case of Vietnam or not. The paper adopts the balance panel data of 267 listed companies on two trading board HOSE and HNX in the period from 2008 to 2015, estimated by FEM, REM, 2SLS and GMM method. To intrinsic factors, research results show that financial leverage and default risk control have high positive statistical significance with the debt maturity, but tangible assets are lower than those factors. In addition, growth opportunities and company quality have negative impacts to the debt maturity. To external factors, the results point out that economic growth, stock market development and governmental regulation's efficiency demonstrate the positive relationship to the debt maturity with fairly low correlation levels. In spite of that, inflation rate, financial development, the rule of law, corruption control and the rights of creditor factors have negative correlations to the debt maturity. Keywords Debt maturity, long-term debt ratio, GMM system, firm-level factors, country-level factors References [1] Barclay, M., Smith, C., Jr., “The maturity structure of corporate debt”, Journal of Finance, 50 (1995), 609-631. [2] Kirch, G., Terra, P.R.S., “Determinants of corporate debt maturity in SouthAmerica: Do institutional quality and financial development matter?”, Journal ofCorporate Finance, 18 (2012) 4, 980-993.[3] Cai, K., Fairchild, R., Guney, Y., “Debt maturity structure of Chinese companies”, Pacific Basin Finance Journal, 16 (2008), 268-297.[4] Deesomsak, R., Paudyal, K. & Pescetto, G., “Debt Maturity Structure and the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis”, Journal of Multinational Financial Management ,19(2009) 1, 26-42. [5] Goyal, V.K., Wang, W., “Debt maturity and asymmetric information: Evidence from default risk changes”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 48 (2013), 789-817.[6] Tesfaye T. Lemma, Minga Negash, “Debt Maturity Choice of a Firm: Evidence from African Countries”, Journal of Business and Policy Research, 7 (2012) 2, 60-92[7] Sérgio Costaa, Luis M. S. Laureanoa, Raul M. S. Laureanoa, “The debt maturity of Portuguese SMEs: The aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis”, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150 (2014 ), 172-181.[8] Myers, S. C., “The Capital Structure Puzzle”, Journal of Finance, 39 (1984), 575-592.[9] Lucas, D., and R. L. McDonald, R. L., “Equity Issues and Stock Price Dynamics”, Journal of Finance, 45 (1990),1019-1043.[10] Flannery, M. J., “Asymmetric Information and Risky Debt Maturity Choice”, Journal of Finance, 41 (1986), 19-37.[11] Douglas W. Diamond, “Monitoring and Reputation: The Choice between Bank Loans and Directly Placed Debt”, The Journal of Political Economy, 99 (1991) 4, 689-721.[12] Morris, “On corporate debt maturity strategies”, Journal of Finance, 31 (1976) 1, 29-37.[13] Myers, S. C.,“Determinants of Corporate Borrowings”, The Journal of Finance, 5 (1977), 147-175.[14] Amir Barnea, Robert A. Haugen, Lemma W. Senbet, “A rationale for debt maturity structure and call provisions in the agency theoretic framework”, The Journal of Finance, 35 (1980) 5, 1223-1234.[15] Jensen M. and W. Meckling, “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Capital Structure”, Journal of Financial Economics, 3 (1976), 305-360.[16] Douglass C. North, “Institutions”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1990) 1, 97-112.[17] Meyer, K. E., “Institutions, transaction costs and entry mode choice in Eastern Europe”, Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (2001), 357-67.[18] Barclay, M.J., Marx, L.M., Smith, C.W., “The joint determination of leverage and maturity”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 9 (2003), 149-167.[19] Johnson, S.A., “Debt maturity and the effect s of growth opportunities and liquidity risk on leverage”, Review of Financial Studies, 16 (2003), 209-236.[20] Antoniou, A., Guney, Y., Paudyal, K., “The determinants of debt maturity structure: Evidence from France, Germany and the UK”, European Financial Management, 12 (2006) 2, 161-194.[21] Lopez-Gracia, J., Mestre-Barbera, R., “Tax effect on Spanish SME optimum debt maturity structure”, Journal of Business Research, 64 (2011), 649-65.[22] Custódio, C., Ferreira, A., Laureano, L., “Why are US firms using more short-term debt?”, Journal of Financial Economics, 108 (2013) 1, 182-212.[23] El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Pittman, J., Rizeanu, S., “Cross-country evidence on the importance of auditor choice to corporate debt maturity”, Contemporary Accounting Research (2014).[24] Belkhir, M., Ben-Nasr, H., Boubaker, S., “Labor protection and corporate debt maturity: International evidence”, UAE University working paper (2014).[25] Stephan, A., Talavera,O., Tsapin, A., “Corporate debt maturity choice in emerging financial markets”, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 51 (2011), 141-151.[26] Bae, K. H., Goyal, V. K., “Creditor rights, enforcement, and bank loans”, The Journal of Finance, 64 (2009) 2, 823-860.[27] Gonzalez-Mendez, V.M., “Determinants of debt maturity structure across firm size”, Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting, 17 (2013), 187-209.[28] Mark Hoven Stohs, David C. Mauer, “The Determinants of Corporate Debt Maturity Structure”, Journal of Business, 69 (1996) 3.[29] Scherr, F. C. and Hulburt, H. M., “The Debt Maturity Structure of Small Firms”, Financial Management, 1 (2001), 85-111.[30] Magri, S., “Debt maturity of Italian firms”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 42 2010, 443-463.[31] Oman, C., Köksal, B., “Debt maturity across firm types: Evidence from a major developing economy”, Emerging Markets Review, 30 (2017), 169-199.[32] Awartani, B., Belkhir, M., Boubaker, S., Maghyereh, A., “Corporate debt maturity in the MENA region: Does institutional quality matter?”, International Review of Financial Analysis, 46 (2016), 309-325.[33] Antonios Antoniou, Yilmaz Guney, Krishna Paudyal, The Determinants of Debt Maturity Structure: Evidence from France, Germany and the UK, European Financial Management, 12 (2006) 2, 161-194.[34] Antoniou, A., Guney, Y., Paudyal, K., “The determinants of capital structure: Capital market-oriented versus bank-oriented institutions”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 43 (2008) 1, 59-92.[35] Fan, J. P., Titman, S., Twite, G., “An international comparison of capital structure and debt maturity choices”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 47 (2012) 1, 23.[36] Garcia-Teruel P, Martinez-Solano P., “Short-term debt in Spanish SMEs”, Int Small Bussiness Journal, 25 (2007), 579-602.[37] Giannetti, M., “Do better institutions mitigate agency problems? Evidence fromcorporate finance choices”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38 (2003) 1, 185-212.[38] Diamond, W., “Presidential address, committing to commit: Short-term debtwhen enforcement is costly”, The Journal of Finance, 59 (2004) 4, 1447-1479.[39] Qian, J., Strahan, E., “How laws and institutions shape financial contracts: The case of bank loans”, The Journal of Finance, 62 (2007) 6, 2803-2834.[40] Aris, “Legal systems, capital structure, and debt maturity in developing countries”, Corp. Gov., 24 (2016), 130-144.[41] Cuneyt Orman, Bülent Köksal, “Debt Maturity across Firm Types: Evidence from a Major Developing Economy”, Emerging Markets Review, 30 (2016). [42] Zheng, X., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C., “National culture and corporate debt maturity”, Journal of Banking & Finance, 36 (2012) 2, 468-488.[43] Jun Qian, Philip E. Strahan, “How Laws and Institutions Shape Financial Contracts: The Case of Bank Loans”, The Journal of Finance, 62 (2007) 6, 2803-2834.[44] Vig, V., “Access to collateral and corporate debt structure: Evidence from a natural experiment”, The Journal of Finance, 68 (2013) 3, 881-928.[45] Cho, S., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Suh, J., “Creditor rights and capital structure: Evidence from international data”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 25 (2014), 40-60.[46] Mark Hoven Stohs, David C Mauer, “The Determinants of Corporate Debt Maturity Structure”, The Journal of Business, 69 (1996) 3, 279-312. [47] Kane, A., A. J. Marcus, R. L. McDonald, “Debt Policy and the Rate of Return Premium to Leverage”, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 20 (1985) 4, 479-499.[48] E. I. Altman, “Corporate financial distress: A complete guide to predicting, avoiding, and dealing with bankruptcy”, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1983. [49] Mackie-Mason, Jeffrey K., “Do Taxes Affect Corporate Financing Decisions?”, Journal of Finance, 45 (1990) 5, 1471-1493.[50] Djankov, S., C. McLiesh, and A. Shleifer, “Private credit in 129 countries”, Journal of Financial Economics, 84 (2007), 299-329.

Abstract: The AFFINITY trial (Assessment of Fluoxetine in Stroke Recovery) reported that oral fluoxetine 20 mg daily for 6 months after acute stroke did not improve functional outcome and increased the risk of falls, bone fractures, and seizures. After trial medication was ceased at 6 months, survivors were followed to 12 months post-randomization. This preplanned secondary analysis aimed to determine any sustained or delayed effects of fluoxetine at 12 months post-randomization. Methods: AFFINITY was a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults (n=1280) with a clinical diagnosis of stroke in the previous 2 to 15 days and persisting neurological deficit who were recruited at 43 hospital stroke units in Australia (n=29), New Zealand (4), and Vietnam (10) between 2013 and 2019. Participants were randomized to oral fluoxetine 20 mg once daily (n=642) or matching placebo (n=638) for 6 months and followed until 12 months after randomization. The primary outcome was function, measured by the modified Rankin Scale, at 6 months. Secondary outcomes for these analyses included measures of the modified Rankin Scale, mood, cognition, overall health status, fatigue, health-related quality of life, and safety at 12 months. Results: Adherence to trial medication was for a mean 167 (SD 48) days and similar between randomized groups. At 12 months, the distribution of modified Rankin Scale categories was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.76–1.14]; P =0.46). Compared with placebo, patients allocated fluoxetine had fewer recurrent ischemic strokes (14 [2.18%] versus 29 [4.55%] ; P =0.02), and no longer had significantly more falls (27 [4.21%] versus 15 [2.35%] ; P =0.08), bone fractures (23 [3.58%] versus 11 [1.72%] ; P =0.05), or seizures (11 [1.71%] versus 8 [1.25%] ; P =0.64) at 12 months. Conclusions: Fluoxetine 20 mg daily for 6 months after acute stroke had no delayed or sustained effect on functional outcome, falls, bone fractures, or seizures at 12 months poststroke. The lower rate of recurrent ischemic stroke in the fluoxetine group is most likely a chance finding. Registration: URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au/ ; Unique identifier: ACTRN12611000774921.

Abstract: Comprehensive profiling of actionable mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is vital to guide targeted therapy, thereby improving the survival rate of patients. Despite the high incidence and mortality rate of NSCLC in Vietnam, the actionable mutation profiles of Vietnamese patients have not been thoroughly examined. Here, we employed massively parallel sequencing to identify alterations in major driver genes ( EGFR , KRAS, NRAS, BRAF , ALK and ROS1 ) in 350 Vietnamese NSCLC patients. We showed that the Vietnamese NSCLC patients exhibited mutations most frequently in EGFR (35.4%) and KRAS (22.6%), followed by ALK (6.6%), ROS1 (3.1%), BRAF (2.3%) and NRAS (0.6%). Interestingly, the cohort of Vietnamese patients with advanced adenocarcinoma had higher prevalence of EGFR mutations than the Caucasian MSK-IMPACT cohort. Compared to the East Asian cohort, it had lower EGFR but higher KRAS mutation prevalence. We found that KRAS mutations were more commonly detected in male patients while EGFR mutations was more frequently found in female. Moreover, younger patients ( 〈 61 years) had higher genetic rearrangements in ALK or ROS1 . In conclusions, our study revealed mutation profiles of 6 driver genes in the largest cohort of NSCLC patients in Vietnam to date, highlighting significant differences in mutation prevalence to other cohorts.