Quali strumenti giuridici statali e regionali per le comunit\ue0 patrimoniali?

The Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (Faro Convention, 2005) recognizes a central role to heritage communities in the process of identification, study, interpretation, protection, conservation and presentation of the cultural heritage. As a signatory State of the Convention (signed on 27th February 2013, still waiting for ratification), Italy has in any case to ensure its contribution to the safeguarding of the tangible and intangible cultural heritage by adequate policies. Currently, a State law providing a general regulation of the participation of civil society to the protection and the enhancement of cultural heritage in the Italian legal system has not been adopted yet. Nevertheless, communities, groups and individuals have a wide range of instruments available, which can be drawn by an accurate interpretation of the Constitution and of many State and regional laws. In the long run, the persistent lack of common rules on this subject may be a source of uncertainty, capable of weakening, instead of strengthening, the role of heritage communities, in contrast with the principles of the Faro Convention

Citizens of Europe

Il titolo della collana esprime la volont\ue0 di approfondire i profili legati al processo di integrazione europeo, non ignorandone i risvolti pi\uf9 discutibili e burocratici ma sapendo guardare al di l\ue0 di essi, nella logica che traspare dal gioco di assonanze indicato dal titolo. In questo terzo volume Citizens of Europe, dedicato ai temi delle identit\ue0 e della cittadinanza culturale, viene in rilievo la tensione tra i limiti delle politiche, culturali e di cittadinanza, perseguite dalla UE e l\u2019imporsi progressivo \u2013 malgrado le cupe ombre proiettate dalla drammatica attualit\ue0 \u2013 di una pi\uf9 ampia nozione di \u2018cittadinanza d\u2019Europa\u2019, scandita in particolare da quei recenti strumenti giuridici del Consiglio d\u2019Europa attraverso i quali l\u2019afflato europeo, non imprigionato nelle pastoie dei meccanismi della EU citizenship, si sviluppa pi\uf9 significativamente

The novel zoonotic COVID-19 pandemic: An expected global health concern

18 years ago, in 2002, the world was astonished by the appearance of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), supported by a zoonotic coronavirus, called SARS-CoV, from the Guangdong Province of southern China. After about 10 years, in 2012, another similar coronavirus triggered the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) in Saudi Arabia. Both caused severe pneumonia killing 774 and 858 people with 8700 cases of confirmed infection for the former, and 2494 for the latter, causing significant economic losses. 8 years later, despite the MERS outbreak remaining in certain parts of the world, at the end of 2019, a new zoonotic coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and responsible of coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), arose from Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. It spread rapidly and to date has killed 3,242 persons with more than 81,000 cases of infection in China and causing over 126,000 global cases and 5,414 deaths in 166 other countries around the world, especially Italy. SARS-CoV-2 would seem to have come from a bat, but the intermediate reservoir continues to be unknown. Nonetheless, as for SARS-CoV and MERS CoV, the Spillover effect linked to animal-human promiscuity, human activities including deforestation, illegal bush-trafficking and bushmeat, cannot be excluded. Recently, however, evidence of inter-human only transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been accumulated and thus, the outbreak seems to be spreading by human-to-human transmission throughout a large part of the world. Herein we will provide with an update on the main features of COVID-19 and suggest possible solutions how to halt the expansion of this novel pandemic

A note on comonotonicity and positivity of the control components of decoupled quadratic FBSDE

In this small note we are concerned with the solution of Forward-Backward Stochastic Differential Equations (FBSDE) with drivers that grow quadratically in the control component (quadratic growth FBSDE or qgFBSDE). The main theorem is a comparison result that allows comparing componentwise the signs of the control processes of two different qgFBSDE. As a byproduct one obtains conditions that allow establishing the positivity of the control process.Comment: accepted for publicatio

An Integrated Cognitive Remediation and Recovery-Oriented Program for Individuals with Bipolar Disorder Using a Virtual Reality-Based Intervention: 6- and 12-Month Cognitive Outcomes from a Randomized Feasibility Trial

Introduction: Achieving long-term impacts from cognitive remediation (CR) interventions is a key goal in rehabilitative care. Integrating virtual reality (VR) with psychoeducational approaches within CR programs has shown promise in enhancing user engagement and addressing the complex needs of individuals with bipolar disorder (BD). A previous randomized controlled crossover feasibility trial demonstrated the viability of a fully immersive VR-CR intervention for BD, reporting low dropout rates, high acceptability, and significant cognitive improvements. This secondary analysis aimed to evaluate the stability of these outcomes over time. Methods: This paper presents a 6- to 12-month follow-up of the initial trial. Secondary cognitive outcomes were assessed, including visuospatial abilities, memory, attention, verbal fluency, and executive function, using validated assessment tools. Statistical analyses were conducted using Friedman’s test. Results: A total of 36 participants completed the 6- to 12-month follow-up. Overall, cognitive functions showed a trend toward stability or improvement over time, except for visuospatial and executive functions, which demonstrated inconsistent trajectories. Significant improvements were observed in language (p = 0.02). Conclusion: This study highlights the overall stability of cognitive functions 12 months after a fully immersive VR-CR program for individuals with BD. To sustain long-term clinical benefits, an integrated approach, such as incorporating psychoeducational strategies within cognitive remediation interventions, may be essential. Further follow-up studies with control groups and larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings

A Recovery-Oriented Program for People with Bipolar Disorder through Virtual Reality-Based Cognitive Remediation: Results of a Feasibility Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Cognitive impairment is a frequent consequence of bipolar disorder (BD) that is difficult to prevent and treat. In addition, the quality of the preliminary evidence on the treatment of BD through Cognitive Remediation (CR) with traditional methods is poor. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a CR intervention with fully immersive Virtual Reality (VR) as an additional treatment for BD and offers preliminary data on its efficacy. Methods: Feasibility randomized controlled cross-over clinical study, with experimental condition lasting three months, crossed between two groups. Experimental condition: CR fully immersive VR recovery-oriented program plus conventional care; Control condition: conventional care. The control group began the experimental condition after a three months period of conventional care (waiting list). After the randomization of 50 people with BD diagnosis, the final sample consists of 39 participants in the experimental condition and 25 in the control condition because of dropouts. Results: Acceptability and tolerability of the intervention were good. Compared to the waitlist group, the experimental group reported a significant improvement regarding cognitive functions (memory: p = 0.003; attention: p = 0.002, verbal fluency: p = 0.010, executive function: p = 0.003), depressive symptoms (p = 0.030), emotional awareness (p = 0.007) and biological rhythms (p = 0.029). Conclusions: The results are preliminary and cannot be considered exhaustive due to the small sample size. However, the evidence of efficacy, together with the good acceptability of the intervention, is of interest. These results suggest the need to conduct studies with larger samples that can confirm this data. Trial registration: ClinicalTrialsgov NCT05070065, registered in September 202

Quality of care provided by Multiple Sclerosis Centers during Covid-19 pandemic: Results of an Italian multicenter patient-centered survey

Background: Covid-19 pandemic impacted on management of people with Multiple Sclerosis (pwMS). Level of satisfaction of pwMS regarding the care received by the staff of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (MSCs) during the pandemic was not fully investigated. In a large patient-centered multicenter study, the therapeutic adherence and quality of care of MSCs was assessed. Methods: In April-May 2021, an online survey was widespread by 16 Italian MSCs. Frequencies, percentages and/or means and standard deviations were calculated to describe the sample. ANOVAs were performed to evaluate the effect of sociodemographic and clinical variables on overall pwMS' rating of MSC assistance. Results: 1670 pwMS completed the survey (67.3% women). During the pandemic, 88% did not change their disease modifying therapy schedule, and 89.1% reached their MSCs with no or little difficulties. Even if only 1.3% of participants underwent a tele-health follow-up visit with their MSC staff, the 80.1% believed that tele-health services should be improved regardless of pandemic. 92% of participants were satisfied of how their MSC took charge of their needs; ANOVAs revealed an effect of disease duration on pwMS' level of satisfaction on MSCs management during the pandemic. Conclusions: The results revealed an efficient MSCs response to Covid-19 pandemic and provided the basis for the implementing of tele-health services that would further improve the taking charge of patients, particularly those with longer disease, higher disability, and/or living far from their MSC

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of modified vaccinia Ankara pre-exposure vaccination against mpox according to previous smallpox vaccine exposure and HIV infection. Prospective cohort study

Background: Pre-exposure vaccination with MVA-BN has been widely used against mpox to contain the 2022 outbreak. Many countries have defined prioritized strategies, administering a single dose to those historically vaccinated for smallpox, to achieve quickly adequate coverage in front of low supplies. Using epidemiological models, real-life effectiveness was estimated at approximately 36%-86%, but no clinical trials were performed. Few data on MVA-BN immunogenicity are currently available, and there are no established correlates of protection. Immunological response in PLWH in the context of the 2022 outbreak was also poorly described. Methods: Blood samples were collected from participants eligible for pre-exposure MVA-BN vaccination before (T1) receiving a full course of vaccine (single-dose for vaccine-experienced or smallpox-primed and two-dose for smallpox vaccine-naïve or smallpox non-primed) and one month after the last dose (T2 and T3, respectively). MPXV-specific IgGs were measured by in-house immunofluorescence assay, using 1:20 as screening dilution, MPXV-specific nAbs by 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50, starting dilution 1:10), and IFN-γ-producing specific T cells to MVA-BN vaccine, by ELISpot assay. Paired or unpaired t-test and Wilcoxon or Mann-Whitney test were used to analyse IgG and nAbs, and T-cell response, as appropriate. The probability of IgG and nAb response in vaccine-experienced vs. vaccine-naïve was estimated in participants not reactive at T1. The McNemar test was used to evaluate vaccination's effect on humoral response both overall and by smallpox vaccination history. In participants who were not reactive at T1, the proportion of becoming responders one month after full-cycle completion by exposure groups was compared by logistic regression and then analysed by HIV status strata (interaction test). The response was also examined in continuous, and the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) of the difference from baseline to schedule completion according to previous smallpox vaccination was estimated after weighting for HIV using a linear regression model. Self-reports of adverse effects following immunization (AEFIs) were prospectively collected after the first MVA-BN dose (T1). Systemic (S-AEFIs: fatigue, myalgia, headache, GI effects, chills) and local (L-AEFIs: redness, swelling, pain) AEFIs were graded as absent (grade 0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3). The maximum level of severity for S-AEFIs and L-AEFIs ever experienced over the 30 days post-dose by vaccination exposure groups were analysed using a univariable multinomial logistic regression model and after adjusting for HIV status; for each of the symptoms, we also compared the mean duration by exposure group using an unpaired t-test. Findings: Among the 164 participants included, 90 (54.8%) were smallpox vaccine-experienced. Median age was 49 years (IQR 41-55). Among the 76 (46%) PLWH, 76% had a CD4 count >500 cells/μL. There was evidence that both the IgG and nAbs titers increased after administration of the MVA-BN vaccine. However, there was no evidence for a difference in the potential mean change in humoral response from baseline to the completion of a full cycle when comparing primed vs. non-primed participants. Similarly, there was no evidence for a difference in the seroconversion rate after full cycle vaccination in the subset of participants not reactive for nAbs at T1 (p = 1.00 by Fisher's exact test). In this same analysis and for the nAbs outcome, there was some evidence of negative effect modification by HIV (interaction p-value = 0.17) as primed people living with HIV (PLWH) showed a lower probability of seroconversion vs. non-primed, and the opposite was seen in PLWoH. When evaluating the response in continuous, we observed an increase in T-cell response after MVA-BN vaccination in both primed and non-primed. There was evidence for a larger increase when using the 2-dose vs. one-dose strategy with a mean difference of -2.01 log2 (p ≤ 0.0001), after controlling for HIV. No evidence for a difference in the risk of developing any AEFIs of any grade were observed by exposure group, except for the lower risk of grade 2 (moderate) fatigue, induration and local pain which was lower in primed vs. non-primed [OR 0.26 (0.08-0.92), p = 0.037; OR 0.30 (0.10-0.88), p = 0.029 and OR 0.19 (0.05-0.73), p = 0.015, respectively]. No evidence for a difference in symptom duration was also detected between the groups. Interpretation: The evaluation of the humoral and cellular response one month after the completion of the vaccination cycle suggested that MVA-BN is immunogenic and that the administration of a two-dose schedule is preferable regardless of the previous smallpox vaccination history, especially in PLWH, to maximize nAbs response. MVA-BN was safe as well tolerated, with grade 2 reactogenicity higher after the first administration in vaccine-naïve than in vaccine-experienced individuals, but with no evidence for a difference in the duration of these adverse effects. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term duration of immunity and to establish specific correlates of protection. Funding: The study was supported by the National Institute for Infectious Disease Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS "Advanced grant 5 × 1000, 2021" and by the Italian Ministry of Health "Ricerca Corrente Linea 2"

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of modified vaccinia Ankara pre-exposure vaccination against mpox according to previous smallpox vaccine exposure and HIV infection: prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure vaccination with MVA-BN has been widely used against mpox to contain the 2022 outbreak. Many countries have defined prioritized strategies, administering a single dose to those historically vaccinated for smallpox, to achieve quickly adequate coverage in front of low supplies. Using epidemiological models, real-life effectiveness was estimated at approximately 36%–86%, but no clinical trials were performed. Few data on MVA-BN immunogenicity are currently available, and there are no established correlates of protection. Immunological response in PLWH in the context of the 2022 outbreak was also poorly described. METHODS: Blood samples were collected from participants eligible for pre-exposure MVA-BN vaccination before (T1) receiving a full course of vaccine (single-dose for vaccine-experienced or smallpox-primed and two-dose for smallpox vaccine-naïve or smallpox non-primed) and one month after the last dose (T2 and T3, respectively). MPXV-specific IgGs were measured by in-house immunofluorescence assay, using 1:20 as screening dilution, MPXV-specific nAbs by 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50, starting dilution 1:10), and IFN-γ-producing specific T cells to MVA-BN vaccine, by ELISpot assay. Paired or unpaired t-test and Wilcoxon or Mann–Whitney test were used to analyse IgG and nAbs, and T-cell response, as appropriate. The probability of IgG and nAb response in vaccine-experienced vs. vaccine-naïve was estimated in participants not reactive at T1. The McNemar test was used to evaluate vaccination's effect on humoral response both overall and by smallpox vaccination history. In participants who were not reactive at T1, the proportion of becoming responders one month after full-cycle completion by exposure groups was compared by logistic regression and then analysed by HIV status strata (interaction test). The response was also examined in continuous, and the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) of the difference from baseline to schedule completion according to previous smallpox vaccination was estimated after weighting for HIV using a linear regression model. Self-reports of adverse effects following immunization (AEFIs) were prospectively collected after the first MVA-BN dose (T1). Systemic (S-AEFIs: fatigue, myalgia, headache, GI effects, chills) and local (L-AEFIs: redness, swelling, pain) AEFIs were graded as absent (grade 0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3). The maximum level of severity for S-AEFIs and L-AEFIs ever experienced over the 30 days post-dose by vaccination exposure groups were analysed using a univariable multinomial logistic regression model and after adjusting for HIV status; for each of the symptoms, we also compared the mean duration by exposure group using an unpaired t-test. FINDING: Among the 164 participants included, 90 (54.8%) were smallpox vaccine-experienced. Median age was 49 years (IQR 41–55). Among the 76 (46%) PLWH, 76% had a CD4 count >500 cells/μL. There was evidence that both the IgG and nAbs titers increased after administration of the MVA-BN vaccine. However, there was no evidence for a difference in the potential mean change in humoral response from baseline to the completion of a full cycle when comparing primed vs. non-primed participants. Similarly, there was no evidence for a difference in the seroconversion rate after full cycle vaccination in the subset of participants not reactive for nAbs at T1 (p = 1.00 by Fisher's exact test). In this same analysis and for the nAbs outcome, there was some evidence of negative effect modification by HIV (interaction p-value = 0.17) as primed people living with HIV (PLWH) showed a lower probability of seroconversion vs. non-primed, and the opposite was seen in PLWoH. When evaluating the response in continuous, we observed an increase in T-cell response after MVA-BN vaccination in both primed and non-primed. There was evidence for a larger increase when using the 2-dose vs. one-dose strategy with a mean difference of −2.01 log2 (p ≤ 0.0001), after controlling for HIV. No evidence for a difference in the risk of developing any AEFIs of any grade were observed by exposure group, except for the lower risk of grade 2 (moderate) fatigue, induration and local pain which was lower in primed vs. non-primed [OR 0.26 (0.08–0.92), p = 0.037; OR 0.30 (0.10–0.88), p = 0.029 and OR 0.19 (0.05–0.73), p = 0.015, respectively]. No evidence for a difference in symptom duration was also detected between the groups. INTERPRETATION: The evaluation of the humoral and cellular response one month after the completion of the vaccination cycle suggested that MVA-BN is immunogenic and that the administration of a two-dose schedule is preferable regardless of the previous smallpox vaccination history, especially in PLWH, to maximize nAbs response. MVA-BN was safe as well tolerated, with grade 2 reactogenicity higher after the first administration in vaccine-naïve than in vaccine-experienced individuals, but with no evidence for a difference in the duration of these adverse effects. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term duration of immunity and to establish specific correlates of protection