Academic literature on the topic 'Daniel Brunner'

The majority of scholarship regarding Native Americans and film has focused on the images of Native Americans as constructed by non-Native filmmakers, but how might we better understand the careers of Native people working as actors in studio Hollywood? I propose studying film publicity material to find traces of the labor and negotiations performed by Native actors as they constructed and maintained their personas. Examining both the construction of studio publicity and analyzing the content of publicity regarding Chief Many Treaties (Blackfeet actor William Hazlett), Chief Yowlachie (Yakama actor Daniel Simmons), Chief Big Tree (Seneca actor Isaac Johnny John); and Chief Rolling Cloud (Muscogee [Creek] actor Charles Brunner), I reveal how publicity material can contextualize actors' experiences and suggest ways that these Native performers used their personas to critique and influence their presences onscreen.

Background:Maintenance of clinical response over time has been shown in individual patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) treated with SC abatacept (ABA).1It is unknown whether each individual pt with sustained efficacy also consistently maintains the previously reported shorter-term benefits on patient-reported outcomes (PROs)2,3over time.Objectives:Investigate whether combined efficacy and stringent, optimal PRO responses to ABA treatment are maintained by individual pts with pJIA over time.Methods:In this analysis of the intent-to-treat population, pts in two age cohorts (2–5 and 6–17 yrs) who achieved clinical response to weekly SC ABA (10–<25 kg [50 mg], 25–<50 kg [87.5 mg], ≥50 kg [125 mg]) at Mo 4 (time point of primary pharmacokinetic endpoint4) were followed for 2 yrs. Stringent efficacy outcomes (Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 27 [JADAS27] minimal disease activity [MDA; ≤3.8] and inactive disease [ID; ≤1] status) were combined with optimal PRO endpoints (childhood [C]HAQ-DI=0, Parental Global Assessment [PaGA] ≤1 and Pain visual analogue scale [VAS] <35). Combined efficacy and PRO responses were analysed at Mos 4, 13 and 21.Results:219 pts entered the study (46 [21.0%] 2–5 yrs; 173 [79.0%] 6–17 yrs); a subgroup of these pts achieved a clinical response at Mo 4 (Table 1). Many pts who achieved JADAS27 MDA or JADAS27 ID combined with optimal PROs at Mo 4 sustained their response at Mo 13, and at both Mo 13 and Mo 21 in the 2–5-yr and 6–17-yr cohorts (Table 1). Across the cohorts, 33–88% of pts maintained a combined JADAS27 MDA with optimal PRO responses through Mo 21. Where estimable, median times to combined efficacy and specific optimal PRO responses were consistent across the cohorts (Table 2; Figs 1, 2).Table 1.Proportion of pts with combined efficacy and optimal PRO responses at Mos 4, 13 and 21EndpointResponders at Mo 4Responders at Mos 4 and 13*Responders at Mos 4, 13 and 21*2–5 yrs (n=46)6–17 yrs (n=173)2–5 yrs6–17 yrs2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=09 (20)34 (20)5/9 (56)25/34 (74)3/9 (33)16/34 (47)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤18 (17)14 (8)8/8 (100)7/14 (50)7/8 (88)5/14 (36)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS <35 mm28 (61)70 (41)25/28 (89)58/70 (83)21/28 (75)43/70 (61)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=07 (15)20 (12)2/7 (29)13/20 (65)1/7 (14)9/20 (45)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤16 (13)10 (6)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS <35 mm17 (37)31 (18)10/17 (59)22/31 (71)8/17 (47)17/31 (55)Data are n (%) or n/N (%). *% based on n of pts who achieved response at Mo 4 (denominator)Table 2.Kaplan–Meier estimates for median (95% CI) times (mos) to achieving combined efficacy and optimal PRO responsesEndpoint2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=021.5 (6.8, NE)21.5 (13.1, 24.4)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤1NE (15.9, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS <35 mm2.8 (1.9, 2.9)3.8 (3.7, 6.6)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=0NE (18.4, NE)24.4 (18.7, NE)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤1NE (21.3, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS <35 mm3.8 (3.8, 10.3)13.2 (10.3, 15.9)NE=not estimableConclusion:Many individuals with pJIA who achieved stringent efficacy and PRO measures with weekly SC abatacept by Mo 4 sustained them over 2 years. Time to achieve combined efficacy and Pain VAS <35 response was shorter than that for PaGA ≤1 and CHAQ-DI=0.References:[1]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2019;78:99–100 (abstr OP0056)[2]Brunner H, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2019;71(suppl 10):abstr 2707[3]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2017;76:75 (abstr OP0058)[4]Brunner HI, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2018;70:1144–54Acknowledgments:Katerina Kumpan, PhD, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers SquibbDisclosure of Interests: :Hermine Brunner Consultant of: Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis, Merck Serono, AbbVie, Amgen, Alter, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Biogen Idec, Boehringer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EMD Serono, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Biosciences, Speakers bureau: GSK, Roche, and Novartis, Nikolay Tzaribachev: None declared, Ingrid Louw Consultant of: Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche (advisory boards), Inmaculada Calvo Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clementia, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Francisco Zapata: None declared, Gerd Horneff Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bayer, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Ivan Foeldvari Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Daniel Kingsbury: None declared, Maria Gastanaga Grant/research support from: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, Carine Wouters Grant/research support from: GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Breedt: None declared, Robert Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Margarita Askelson Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alberto Martini Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Daniel J Lovell Consultant of: Abbott (consulting and PI), AbbVie (PI), Amgen (consultant and DSMC Chairperson), AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (PI), Celgene, Forest Research (DSMB Chairman), GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen (co-PI), Novartis (consultant and PI), Pfizer (consultant and PI), Roche (PI), Takeda, UBC (consultant and PI), Wyeth, Employee of: Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Speakers bureau: Wyeth, Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, F Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi (paid to institution), Consultant of: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda, Speakers bureau: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda

O problema da atenção conjunta tem assumido um lugar importante na psicologia do desenvolvimento e nos estudos da cognição social. Para além dos estudos realizados por Jerome Bruner e Michael Tomasello, Daniel Stern trouxe valiosas contribuições ao tema, baseado em observações sobre a partilha afetiva entre a mãe e o bebê num plano pré-verbal. Neste estudo analisamos algumas destas contribuições, à luz de intercessores ligados à ecologia da atenção, à abordagem da enação e aos estudos da produção de subjetividade. A partir de Daniel Stern, Félix Guattari e Yves Citton, o bebê é descrito como um cartógrafo, na medida em que sua atenção é concentrada e aberta ao plano coletivo de forças e afetos. Articulada com os conceitos de percepção amodal, afetos de vitalidade e sintonia afetiva, a atenção conjunta surge como um modo de conhecer e estar junto com outra pessoa, colocando em evidência a dimensão cognitiva do afeto.

Background:The calcium-binding proteins S100A8/A9 (calprotectin) and S100A12 (extracellular newly identified receptor for advanced glycation end-products binding protein [EN-RAGE]) are involved in multiple signalling pathways to mediate inflammation, can be secreted by activated monocytes/macrophages and exhibit cytokine-like extracellular functions. Circulating levels of these proteins have been associated with disease and clinical responses in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA), including treatment response.1 Studies suggest that serum S100A8/A9 and S100A12, which are released at inflammation sites, are more specific biomarkers of local inflammation (e.g. in the synovium) than systemic biomarkers such as CRP and ESR.2,3Objectives:To investigate if baseline S100A8/A9 and S100A12 predict clinical response to abatacept treatment in polyarticular JIA (pJIA), and to assess whether changes from baseline in S100A8/A9 or S100A12 can be better prognostic markers for response to abatacept treatment than CRP in pJIA.Methods:Data are from a phase III trial of SC abatacept for the treatment of pJIA (NCT01844518).4 This 24-month, single-arm, open-label, international, multicentre, two-part study included male and female patients with pJIA aged 2–17 years. This analysis examined the correlation between biomarkers (S100A8/A9, S100A12 and high-sensitivity CRP [hsCRP]) and disease activity (measured using Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score [JADAS]) at baseline, baseline biomarker values as predictors of future treatment response (ACR and JADAS endpoints), and the correlation between change from baseline in biomarker values and treatment response at Day 113.Results:Of 219 total patients, 158 (72%) had S100A8/A9 values and 155 (71%) had S100A12 values at baseline. Median S100A8/A9 and S100A12 values were 3295 ng/mL (normal range, 716–3004 ng/mL) and 176 ng/mL (normal range, 32–385 ng/mL), respectively. S100A8/A9, S100A12 and hsCRP (median 0.20 mg/dL; normal ≤0.6 mg/dL) had a low-to-moderate but significant association with disease activity at baseline; coefficients for associations between JADAS71-CRP low disease activity (LDA) and the biomarkers S100A8/A9, S100A12 and hsCRP were 0.23 (p=0.0038), 0.16 (p=0.0448) and 0.26 (p=0.0001), respectively. Baseline S100A8/A9 level above the median was associated with lower odds of ACR100 at Day 113 (p=0.0052). Figure 1 shows the associations of baseline biomarker values with Day 113 ACR and JADAS scores in the overall population. Baseline S100A8/A9 or S100A12 did not significantly influence ACR50 or ACR70 responses at Day 113, but high baseline values were associated with reduced odds of ACR90 (p=0.01), ACR100 (p=0.005), ACR-inactive disease (ID) (p=0.0001), and JADAS71-CRP (LDA) (p=0.02). By Day 477, elevated baseline S100A12 was still significantly associated with lower odds of ACR100 overall (0.467; p=0.0248) but baseline S100A8/A9 was not; at Day 645, neither was significantly associated with ACR100 response. At Day 113, changes from baseline in S100A8/A9 and S100A12 were correlated with ACR100 (coefficients of 0.22 [p=0.0082] and 0.26 [p=0.0015], respectively) and with ACR-ID (0.22 [p=0.0067] and 0.26 [p=0.0014], respectively); change in hsCRP was not significantly correlated with disease response.Conclusion:S100A8/A9 and S100A12 may serve as prognostic biomarkers to predict response to abatacept treatment at Day 113. Changes from baseline S100A8/A9 and S100A12 levels were more highly correlated with efficacy outcomes including ACR100 and ACR-ID at Day 113 compared with hsCRP.References:[1]Aljaberi N, et al. Pediatr Rheumatol Online J 2020;18:7.[2]Hammer H, et al. Arthritis Res Ther 2011;13:R178.[3]Nordal HH, et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014;15:335.[4]Brunner H, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018;70:1144–1154.Acknowledgements:Professional medical writing and editorial assistance was provided by Rob Coover, MPH, at Caudex and was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.Disclosure of Interests:Nicolino Ruperto Speakers bureau: NR has received honoraria for consultancies or speaker bureaus (< 10.000 USD each) from the following pharmaceutical companies in the past 3 years: Ablynx, Astrazeneca-Medimmune, Bayer, Biogen, Boehringer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sinergie, Sobi and UCB, Consultant of: NR has received honoraria for consultancies or speaker bureaus (< 10.000 USD each) from the following pharmaceutical companies in the past 3 years: Ablynx, Astrazeneca-Medimmune, Bayer, Biogen, Boehringer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sinergie, Sobi and UCB, Grant/research support from: The IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini (IGG), where NR works as full-time public employee has received contributions (>10.000 USD each) from the following industries in the last 3 years: Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, F Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi. This funding has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in a fully independent manner, without any commitment with third parties., Grant Schulert Speakers bureau: Novartis, Consultant of: SOBI, Alyssa Sproles: None declared, Sherry Thornton: None declared, Gabriel Vega Cornejo Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Parexel, Sanofi, Jordi Anton Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Gebro, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Gebro, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Gebro, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Novimmune, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sobi, Ruben Cuttica Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Michael Henrickson: None declared, Ivan Foeldvari Consultant of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Hexal, MEDAC, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Daniel Kingsbury Consultant of: Pfizer, Margarita Askelson Consultant of: Currently working for Syneos Health providing services to Bristol Myers Squibb, Jinqi Liu Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Sumanta Mukherjee Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Robert Wong Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daniel J Lovell Speakers bureau: Genentech, Wyeth Pharm, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Takeda, UBC, Wyeth Pharma, Xoma, Alberto Martini Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Idorsia, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Alexei Grom Consultant of: AB2Bio, Novartis, Sobi (NovImmune), Grant/research support from: AB2Bio, Novartis, Sobi (NovImmune), Hermine Brunner Speakers bureau: GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Paid instructor for: Novartis, Pfizer (funds go to CCHMC/employer), Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB (funds go to CCHMC/employer), Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer (funds go to CCHMC/employer).

This thesis explores how hope in relation to the threats to the earth’s biosphere can be formulated theologically. The starting-point is a questioning of hope raised by the French sociologist and anthropologist Bruno Latour. In Facing Gaia. Eight Lectures on the New Climatic Regime (2015) he asks why so little has happened to reduce the emissions of CO2. Parts of his answers relate to the view that hope is preventing action. Since hope is a central part of Christian doctrine, this study lets Latours scepticism meet some eco-theological litterature, mainly representing evangelical, orthodox and radical material theology, and religious naturalism. Since critic against eschatology is important in Latours explanatory model, this theme is discussed together with the possibilities of the church practices of liturgy and eucharistic celebration, especially in relation to the concept of time and space, the latter elaborated by the radical material theologian Petra Carlsson Redell. Although putting different emphasis on an ultimate eschatological hope, all authors stress the importance of acting now. The evangelical authors Daniel Brunner et al. present a strategy “living as if”, practicing restoration of the Earth here and now. In religious naturalism the hope lies in the common biological ground for all humanity and living things, also leading to a caring ethics. In general, relationality and materiality as well as including marginalized voices are important concepts when the authors are formulating environmental ethics and eco-theology.  The concept of hope is shown to be important to define, in order to sort out especially false hope from a possibly fruitful concept: resilient hope. A resilient hope is grounded in Christian discipleship, is adaptive and able to recover. It is in a reciprocal relation to action. To develop a resilient hope I argue that it is important to allow both desperation and hope, since the free moving between the two “poles” can act liberating and enable action. A resilient hope gives space for scepticism since it is grounded in a reality always on the move. It is open for emergence and construction. Christianity has resources to house the space between hope and despair both in central biblical narratives and in bodily practices as liturgy and eucharist. Resilient hope in this thesis is earthbound, withstands being lost, and arises again and again in search for new constructive possibilities.

This book examines the transformative potential of ballroom dance, and especially how it can make anyone become beautiful. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork with a local community of amateur ballroom dancers from the Regent Ballroom and Banquet Center in Savoy, Illinois, the book explores the intersection of notions of beauty and experience—the act of becoming beautiful through performance. It considers the ethnographic trope of becoming beautiful as an “expression” in the sense suggested by Victor Turner and Edward Bruner in their anthropological work on experience. It demonstrates how the contemporary performance of ballroom dance among amateurs generates feelings of positive personal transformation, of becoming beautiful. The book also discusses the dance hall as a social space where disparate groups come together to move in synchrony, along with the ways in which race, class, and gender converge in ballroom dancing. Finally, it provides detailed ethnographic data on the formation of affinity groups.

This chapter offers an aesthetic approach to co-production processes at a micro level to understand how citizens, social care professionals, and researchers contribute to developing music- and empowerment-based tools for citizen involvement in social-psychiatric care. The chapter draws on empirical material from a research-circle-based project about dream workshops within a Danish municipal social-psychiatric care unit. The chapter addresses music as supporting empowerment within the processes of co-production of citizens' action plans, and music is understood as an aesthetic dimension of these processes. The chapter includes a pragmatic research perspective on knowledge and experience building and generation of empirical insights, drawing on Dewey and Bruner, realized in the research circle method.