Quantum Computing

Quantum mechanics---the theory describing the fundamental workings of nature---is famously counterintuitive: it predicts that a particle can be in two places at the same time, and that two remote particles can be inextricably and instantaneously linked. These predictions have been the topic of intense metaphysical debate ever since the theory's inception early last century. However, supreme predictive power combined with direct experimental observation of some of these unusual phenomena leave little doubt as to its fundamental correctness. In fact, without quantum mechanics we could not explain the workings of a laser, nor indeed how a fridge magnet operates. Over the last several decades quantum information science has emerged to seek answers to the question: can we gain some advantage by storing, transmitting and processing information encoded in systems that exhibit these unique quantum properties? Today it is understood that the answer is yes. Many research groups around the world are working towards one of the most ambitious goals humankind has ever embarked upon: a quantum computer that promises to exponentially improve computational power for particular tasks. A number of physical systems, spanning much of modern physics, are being developed for this task---ranging from single particles of light to superconducting circuits---and it is not yet clear which, if any, will ultimately prove successful. Here we describe the latest developments for each of the leading approaches and explain what the major challenges are for the future.Comment: 26 pages, 7 figures, 291 references. Early draft of Nature 464, 45-53 (4 March 2010). Published version is more up-to-date and has several corrections, but is half the length with far fewer reference

Autonomic neuropathy predisposes to rosiglitazone-induced vascular leakage in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, controlled trial on thiazolidinedione-induced vascular leakage

Contains fulltext : 88447.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The mechanism of fluid-related complications caused by thiazolidinedione derivatives is unclear. One potential mechanism is thiazolidinedione-induced arterial vasodilatation, which results in vascular leakage and a fall in blood pressure, normally counterbalanced by sympathetic activation and subsequent renal fluid retention. We hypothesised that thiazolidinedione-induced vascular leakage will be particularly prominent in patients with autonomic neuropathy. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study in 40 patients with type 2 diabetes on insulin treatment recruited from a university medical centre. The randomisation was performed by a central office using a randomisation schedule. Both treatment groups, placebo (n = 21) and rosiglitazone (n = 19), were stratified for sex and level of autonomic neuropathy as assessed by Ewing score (or=2.5). We investigated the effects of 16 weeks of treatment with rosiglitazone 4 mg twice daily on vascular leakage (transcapillary escape rate of albumin, TERalb), body weight, extracellular volume and plasma volume. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were included in the analysis. In patients with high Ewing scores (n = 16), rosiglitazone increased TERalb significantly (DeltaTERalb: rosiglitazone +2.43 +/- 0.45%/h, placebo -0.11 +/- 0.15%/h, p = 0.002), while rosiglitazone had no effect in the patients with low Ewing scores (n = 23). Rosiglitazone-induced increases in TERalb and Ewing score at baseline were correlated (r = 0.65, p = 0.02). There was no correlation between Ewing score and rosiglitazone-induced changes in fluid variables. One subject was withdrawn from the study because of atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Rosiglitazone may increase vascular leakage in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes with autonomic neuropathy. Autonomic neuropathy did not exaggerate rosiglitazone-induced fluid retention. Therefore, autonomic neuropathy should be considered as a risk factor for thiazolidinedione-induced oedema, not for thiazolidinedione-induced fluid retention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00422955. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.1 september 201

Cancer Risk in Diabetic Patients Treated with Metformin: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence has suggested that metformin potentially reduces the risk of cancer. Our objective was to enhance the precision of estimates of the effect of metformin on the risk of any-site and site-specific cancers in patients with diabetes. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We performed a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for pertinent articles published as of October 12, 2011, and included them in a systematic review and meta-analysis. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) for overall cancer mortality and cancer incidence. Of the 21,195 diabetic patients reported in 6 studies (4 cohort studies, 2 RCTs), 991 (4.5%) cases of death from cancer were reported. A total of 11,117 (5.3%) cases of incident cancer at any site were reported among 210,892 patients in 10 studies (2 RCTs, 6 cohort studies, 2 case-control studies). The risks of cancer among metformin users were significantly lower than those among non-metformin users: the pooled RRs (95% confidence interval) were 0.66 (0.49-0.88) for cancer mortality, 0.67 (0.53-0.85) for all-cancer incidence, 0.68 (0.53-0.88) for colorectal cancer (n = 6), 0.20 (0.07-0.59) for hepatocellular cancer (n = 4), 0.67 (0.45-0.99) for lung cancer (n = 3). CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The use of metformin in diabetic patients was associated with significantly lower risks of cancer mortality and incidence. However, this analysis is mainly based on observational studies and our findings underscore the more need for long-term RCTs to confirm this potential benefit for individuals with diabetes