Observation of Structures in the Processes e^{+}e^{-}→ωχ_{c1} and ωχ_{c2}

We present measurements of the Born cross sections for the processes e^{+}e^{-}→ωχ_{c1} and ωχ_{c2} at center-of-mass energies sqrt[s] from 4.308 to 4.951 GeV. The measurements are performed with data samples corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 11.0  fb^{-1} collected with the BESIII detector operating at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider storage ring. Assuming the e^{+}e^{-}→ωχ_{c2} signals come from a single resonance, the mass and width are determined to be M=(4413.6±9.0±0.8)  MeV/c^{2} and Γ=(110.5±15.0±2.9)  MeV, respectively, which is consistent with the parameters of the well-established resonance ψ(4415). In addition, we also use one single resonance to describe the e^{+}e^{-}→ωχ_{c1} line shape and determine the mass and width to be M=(4544.2±18.7±1.7)  MeV/c^{2} and Γ=(116.1±33.5±1.7)  MeV, respectively. The structure of this line shape, observed for the first time, requires further understanding.

Coupled-Channel Analysis of the χ_{c1}(3872) Line Shape with BESIII Data

We perform a study of the χ_{c1}(3872) line shape using the data samples of e^{+}e^{-}→γχ_{c1}(3872), χ_{c1}(3872)→D^{0}D[over ¯]^{0}π^{0}, and π^{+}π^{-}J/ψ collected with the BESIII detector. The effects of the coupled channels and the off-shell D^{*0} are included in the parametrization of the line shape. The line shape mass parameter is obtained to be M_{X}=(3871.63±0.13_{-0.05}^{+0.06})  MeV. Two poles are found on the first and second Riemann sheets corresponding to the D^{*0}D[over ¯]^{0} branch cut. The pole location on the first sheet is much closer to the D^{*0}D[over ¯]^{0} threshold than the other, and is determined to be 7.04±0.15_{-0.08}^{+0.07}  MeV above the D^{0}D[over ¯]^{0}π^{0} threshold with an imaginary part -0.19±0.08_{-0.19}^{+0.14}  MeV.

Observation of the Anomalous Shape of X(1840) in J/ψ→γ3(π^{+}π^{-}) Indicating a Second Resonance Near pp[over ¯] Threshold

Using a sample of (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events, which is about 45 times larger than that was previously analyzed, a further investigation on the J/ψ→γ3(π^{+}π^{-}) decay is performed. A significant distortion at 1.84  GeV/c^{2} in the line shape of the 3(π^{+}π^{-}) invariant mass spectrum is observed for the first time, which could be resolved by two overlapping resonant structures, X(1840) and X(1880). The new state X(1880) is observed with a statistical significance larger than 10σ. The mass and width of X(1880) are determined to be 1882.1±1.7±0.7  MeV/c^{2} and 30.7±5.5±2.4  MeV, respectively, which indicates the existence of a pp[over ¯] bound state.

Study of the f_{0}(980) and f_{0}(500) Scalar Mesons through the Decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}

Using e^{+}e^{-} collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 7.33  fb^{-1} recorded by the BESIII detector at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV, we present an analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}, where the D_{s}^{+} is produced via the process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*±}D_{s}^{∓}. We observe the f_{0}(980) in the π^{+}π^{-} system and the branching fraction of the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} with f_{0}(980)→π^{+}π^{-} measured to be (1.72±0.13_{stat}±0.10_{syst})×10^{-3}, where the uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The dynamics of the D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} decay are studied with the simple pole parametrization of the hadronic form factor and the Flatté formula describing the f_{0}(980) in the differential decay rate, and the product of the form factor f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| is determined for the first time to be f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.017_{stat}±0.035_{syst}. Furthermore, the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e} is searched for the first time but no signal is found. The upper limit on the branching fraction of D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e}, f_{0}(500)→π^{+}π^{-} decay is set to be 3.3×10^{-4} at 90% confidence level.

Observation of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} in the Amplitude Analysis of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η

We perform for the first time an amplitude analysis of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η and report the observation of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} using 2.93  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken at a center-of-mass energy of 3.773 GeV with the BESIII detector. As the only W-annihilation-free decay among D to a_{0}(980) pseudoscalar, D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} is the ideal decay in extracting the contributions of the W-emission amplitudes involving a_{0}(980) and to study the final-state interactions. The absolute branching fraction of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η is measured to be (1.27±0.04_{stat}±0.03_{syst})%. The branching fractions of intermediate processes D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} with a_{0}(980)^{+}→π^{+}η and D^{+}→π^{+}K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0} with K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0}→K_{S}^{0}η are measured to be (1.33±0.05_{stat}±0.04_{syst})% and (0.14±0.03_{stat}±0.01_{syst})%, respectively.

Observation of Significant Flavor-SU(3) Breaking in the Kaon Wave Function at 12<Q^{2}<25 GeV^{2} and Discovery of the Charmless Decay ψ(3770)→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0}

We present cross sections for the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0} at center-of-mass energies ranging from 3.51 to 4.95 GeV using data samples collected in the BESIII experiment, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 26.5  fb^{-1}. The ratio of neutral-to-charged kaon form factors at large momentum transfers (12 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

M Ablikim Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M N Achasov Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
P Adlarson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X C Ai Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
R Aliberti Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Amoroso University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M R An Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Q An State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Bai Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
O Bakina Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
I Balossino INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
Y Ban Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
H-R Bao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
V Batozskaya Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
K Begzsuren Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
N Berger Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Berlowski National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
M Bertani INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
D Bettoni INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
F Bianchi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
E Bianco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
A Bortone University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Boyko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
R A Briere Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
A Brueggemann University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
H Cai Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X Cai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Calcaterra INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
G F Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S A Cetin Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
J F Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T T Chang Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, People's Republic of China
W L Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Che Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Chelkov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
C Chen Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Chao Chen Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
G Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H S Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M L Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Chen Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S L Chen North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
S M Chen Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X R Chen Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y B Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Q Chen Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z J Chen Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
S K Choi Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
X Chu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Cibinetto INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
S C Coen Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
F Cossio INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
J J Cui Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
H L Dai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J P Dai Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
A Dbeyssi Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
R E de Boer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
D Dedovich Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Z Y Deng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
A Denig Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I Denysenko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
M Destefanis University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F De Mori University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
B Ding Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X X Ding Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
J Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Dong Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
M C Du Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S X Du Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Z H Duan Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Egorov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y H Fan North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
J Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S S Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W X Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Q Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
R Farinelli INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
L Fava University of Eastern Piedmont, I-15121 Alessandria, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Feldbauer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Felici INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
C Q Feng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J H Feng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
K Fischer University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Fritsch Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C D Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Fu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y W Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Gao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y N Gao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Yang Gao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Garbolino INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Garzia INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
P T Ge Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
Z W Ge Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
C Geng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
E M Gersabeck University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
A Gilman University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
K Goetzen GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
L Gong Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
W X Gong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W Gradl Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S Gramigna INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
M Greco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M H Gu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y T Gu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Y Guan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Guan Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
A Q Guo Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L B Guo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M J Guo Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
R P Guo Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, People's Republic of China
Y P Guo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
A Guskov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
J Gutierrez Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
T T Han Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W Y Han Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X Q Hao Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
F A Harris University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
K K He Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
K L He Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H H Heinsius Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C H Heinz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y K Heng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C Herold Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
T Holtmann Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
P C Hong Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
G Y Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y R Hou University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Y Hu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H M Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Hu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
T Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G S Huang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
K X Huang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
L Q Huang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Huang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Huang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Hussain University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
N Hüsken Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
N In der Wiesche University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
M Irshad State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Jackson Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
S Jaeger Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
S Janchiv Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
J H Jeong Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
Q Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q P Ji Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
X B Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X L Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Ji Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X Q Jia Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z K Jia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H J Jiang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
P C Jiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S S Jiang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T J Jiang Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
X S Jiang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Jiang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J B Jiao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z Jiao Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
S Jin Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Y Jin University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
M Q Jing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X M Jing University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Johansson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X Kui Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Kabana Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
N Kalantar-Nayestanaki University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
X L Kang China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
X S Kang Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
M Kavatsyuk University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
B C Ke Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
V Khachatryan Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
A Khoukaz University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
R Kiuchi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Kliemt GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
O B Kolcu Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
B Kopf Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
M Kuessner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
A Kupsc National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W Kühn Justus-Liebig-Universitaet Giessen, II. Physikalisches Institut, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 16, D-35392 Giessen, Germany
J J Lane University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
P Larin Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Lavania Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
L Lavezzi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
T T Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H Leithoff Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Lellmann Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
T Lenz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
C Li Qufu Normal University, Qufu 273165, People's Republic of China
C Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
C H Li Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Cheng Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
D M Li Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
F Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H B Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Li Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H N Li South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
Hui Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
J R Li Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
J S Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J W Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Ke Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L K Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Lei Li Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, People's Republic of China
M H Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
P R Li Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Q X Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S X Li Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
W D Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Xiaoyu Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y G Li Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z J Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Z X Li Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Liang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
H Liang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Liang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y F Liang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
Y T Liang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Liao Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
L Z Liao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Liao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Libby Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
A Limphirat Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
D X Lin Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Lin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B J Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Liu Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
C Liu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
C X Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H Liu Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
Fang Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Feng Liu Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
G M Liu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
H Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
H B Liu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
H M Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huanhuan Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huihui Liu Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, People's Republic of China
J B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Y Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Y Liu Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Ke Liu Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
L Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L C Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Lu Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
M H Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
P L Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W K Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W M Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z A Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Q Liu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X C Lou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F X Lu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H J Lu Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
J G Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Lu Central South University, Changsha 410083, People's Republic of China
Y P Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C L Luo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M X Luo Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, People's Republic of China
T Luo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X L Luo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X R Lyu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y F Lyu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
F C Ma Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
H Ma Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
H L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L L Ma Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Q Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Ma Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y M Ma Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
F E Maas Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Maggiora University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Malde University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Q A Malik University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
A Mangoni INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
Y J Mao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z P Mao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Marcello University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
Z X Meng University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
J G Messchendorp GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
G Mezzadri INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
H Miao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T J Min Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
R E Mitchell Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
X H Mo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Moses Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
N Yu Muchnoi Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
J Muskalla Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y Nefedov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
F Nerling Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I B Nikolaev Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
Z Ning Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Nisar COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus, Defence Road, Off Raiwind Road, 54000 Lahore, Pakistan
Q L Niu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
W D Niu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Niu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S L Olsen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Ouyang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Pacetti INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy University of Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
X Pan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Pan Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
A Pathak Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
P Patteri INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
Y P Pei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M Pelizaeus Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
H P Peng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Peng Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
K Peters GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J L Ping Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
R G Ping Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Plura Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
V Prasad Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
F Z Qi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Qi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H R Qi Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
M Qi Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T Y Qi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Qian Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W B Qian University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Qiao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J J Qin University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
L Q Qin Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
X S Qin Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z H Qin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Qiu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Q Qu Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
C F Redmer Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K J Ren Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A Rivetti INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M Rolo INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
G Rong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ch Rosner Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S N Ruan Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
N Salone National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
A Sarantsev Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y Schelhaas Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K Schoenning Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
M Scodeggio INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
K Y Shan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W Shan Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, People's Republic of China
X Y Shan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Shangguan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
L G Shao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Shao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C P Shen Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
H F Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W H Shen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B A Shi University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H C Shi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J L Shi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Y Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Q Shi Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
R S Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J J Song Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
T Z Song Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W M Song Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y J Song Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y X Song Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S Sosio University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Spataro University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Stieler Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y J Su University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G B Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G X Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Sun University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H K Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Sun Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
K Sun Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
S S Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Sun Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
W Y Sun Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Sun China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
Y J Sun State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Z Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z T Sun Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y X Tan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C J Tang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
G Y Tang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Tang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y A Tang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
L Y Tao University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Q T Tao Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
M Tat University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
J X Teng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
V Thoren Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W H Tian Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
W H Tian Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y Tian Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z F Tian Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
I Uman Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus, 99138, Mersin 10, Turkey
Y Wan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
S J Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
B Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Bo Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C W Wang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
D Y Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
F Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
H J Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J P Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
K Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L L Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Meng Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Y Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
T Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T J Wang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W Wang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
W P Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
X F Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
X J Wang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X L Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Y D Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y F Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Wang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
Y N Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y Q Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yaqian Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Hebei University, Baoding 071002, People's Republic of China
Yi Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Z Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z L Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Z Y Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ziyi Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D Wei University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
D H Wei Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
F Weidner University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
S P Wen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C W Wenzel Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
U Wiedner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Wilkinson University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Wolke Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
L Wollenberg Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C Wu Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
J F Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
L H Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Wu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X H Wu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Wu University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Wu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y J Wu Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Xia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X M Xian Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T Xiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
D Xiao Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
G Y Xiao Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S Y Xiao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Xiao Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Z J Xiao Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
C Xie Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
X H Xie Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Xie Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y G Xie Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Xie Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
Z P Xie State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Y Xing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C J Xu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
G F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
Q J Xu Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
Q N Xu Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, People's Republic of China
W Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W L Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X P Xu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y C Xu Yantai University, Yantai 264005, People's Republic of China
Z P Xu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Z S Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
L Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W B Yan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W C Yan Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
X Q Yan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Yang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
H L Yang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Tao Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y F Yang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Y X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yifan Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z W Yang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z P Yao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M Ye Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M H Ye China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
J H Yin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y You Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
B X Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C X Yu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J S Yu Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
T Yu University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X D Yu Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
C Z Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Yuan Beihang University, Beijing 100191, People's Republic of China
S C Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y Yuan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
C X Yue Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A A Zafar University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
F R Zeng Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S H Zeng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X Zeng Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Zeng Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
Y J Zeng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhai Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhai Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
A Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D H Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Y Zhang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H Zhang University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H C Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
J J Zhang Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
J L Zhang Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, People's Republic of China
J Q Zhang Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
J W Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J X Zhang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Jianyu Zhang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L M Zhang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Q Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Y Zhang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Shuihan Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Shulei Zhang Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
X D Zhang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
X M Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Y T Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yan Zhang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yao Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z D Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Ling Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M G Zhao Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
R P Zhao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Zhao Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y X Zhao Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z G Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Zhemchugov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
B Zheng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
J P Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W J Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y H Zheng University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Zhong Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
X Zhong Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H Zhou Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
L P Zhou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Zhou Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X K Zhou Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
X R Zhou State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhou Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Y Z Zhou Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Zhu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
K Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K J Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Zhu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
L X Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S H Zhu University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
S Q Zhu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z A Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J H Zou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Zu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China

Collapse

[Effect of sirolimus combined with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody desensitization on the prognosis of patients underwent haploidentical stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To investigate the effects of sirolimus combined with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody desensitization on the prognosis of patients with haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT). Methods: Fifteen consecutive patients who received haplo-SCT and pre-transplant donor specific anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody (DSA) positive [mean fluorescence intensity (MFI)≥2 000] in the Institute of Hematological Diseases from November 2021 to March 2023 were retrospectively recruited into the desensitized group. There were 4 males and 11 females, with a median age [M(Q1, Q3)] of 48 (37, 59) years. All patients were desensitized with sirolimus combined with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. The non-desensitized group included 29 patients with haplo-SCT who had not received desensitization treatment from August 2012 to June 2016. There were 12 males and 17 females with a median age of 42 (26, 50) years. Up to October 1, 2023, the median follow-up time was 13 (9, 18) months in the study group and 23 (14, 29) months in the control group. The changes of MFI before and after desensitization treatment and the prognosis of patients in the desensitized group were compared, including the incidence of primary implantation failure (pGF), neutrophil implantation time, platelet implantation time, grade Ⅱ-Ⅳ acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and chronic GVHD incidence, non-recurrence related mortality, event-free survival rate, disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate. The survival curve was drawn by Kaplan-Meier method, and the survival rate between groups was compared with Log-rank test. Results: After desensitization treatment, the level of DSA MFI in the desensitized group decreased from 8 879 (7 544, 11 495) to 3 781 (1 638, 4 165) after desensitization treatment (P<0.01). All of the patients achieved hematopoietic recovery, and the median time for neutrophil and platelet engraftment were 14 (11, 15) and 20 (18, 25) days, respectively. The incidence of pGF in the desensitized group was 0, which was lower than that in the non-desensitized group (34.5%, 10/29) (P=0.011). The expected 1-year disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate in the desensitized group were 100% (15/15) and 100% (15/15) respectively, while those in the non-desensitized group were 75.9% (22/29) and 75.9% (22/29) respectively, the difference was not statistically significant (both P>0.05). The one-year event-free survival rate in the desensitized group was expected to be 100% (15/15), which was higher than that in the non-desensitized group (51.3%, 15/29) (P=0.002). Conclusion: Sirolimus combined with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody desensitization therapy can reduce the DSA level of haplo-SCT recipients, promote hematopoietic engraftment after transplantation, and avoid the occurrence of pGF after transplantation.

Investigation of the ΔI=1/2 Rule and Test of CP Symmetry through the Measurement of Decay Asymmetry Parameters in Ξ^{-} Decays

Using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, numerous Ξ^{-} and Λ decay asymmetry parameters are simultaneously determined from the process J/ψ→Ξ^{-}Ξ[over ¯]^{+}→Λ(pπ^{-})π^{-}Λ[over ¯](n[over ¯]π^{0})π^{+} and its charge-conjugate channel. The precisions of α_{Λ0} for Λ→nπ^{0} and α[over ¯]_{Λ0} for Λ[over ¯]→n[over ¯]π^{0} compared to world averages are improved by factors of 4 and 1.7, respectively. The ratio of decay asymmetry parameters of Λ→nπ^{0} to that of Λ→pπ^{-}, ⟨α_{Λ0}⟩/⟨α_{Λ-}⟩, is determined to be 0.873±0.012_{-0.010}^{+0.011}, where the first and the second uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The ratio is smaller than unity more than 5σ, which signifies the existence of the ΔI=3/2 transition in Λ for the first time. Besides, we test for CP symmetry in Ξ^{-}→Λπ^{-} and in Λ→nπ^{0} with the best precision to date.

Observation of D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, Precision Test of Lepton Flavor Universality with D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}l^{+}ν_{l}, and First Measurements of D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}μ^{+}ν_{μ} Decay Dynamics

By analyzing 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we report the observation of the semileptonic decay D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, with a statistical significance larger than 10σ, and the measurements of the D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} decay dynamics for the first time. The branching fractions of D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} are determined to be (2.235±0.051_{stat}±0.052_{syst})% and (0.801±0.055_{stat}±0.028_{syst})%, respectively, with precision improved by factors of 6.0 and 6.6 compared to the previous best measurements. Combined with the results for the decays D_{s}^{+}→ηe^{+}ν_{e} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}e^{+}ν_{e}, the ratios of the decay widths are examined both inclusively and in several ℓ^{+}ν_{ℓ} four-momentum transfer ranges. No evidence for lepton flavor universality violation is found within the current statistics. The products of the hadronic form factors f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| are determined. The results based on the two-parameter series expansion are f_{+,0}^{η}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.452±0.010_{stat}±0.007_{syst} and f_{+,0}^{η^{'}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.037_{stat}±0.012_{syst}, which help to constrain present models on f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0). The forward-backward asymmetries are determined to be ⟨A_{FB}^{η}⟩=-0.059±0.031_{stat}±0.005_{syst} and ⟨A_{FB}^{η^{'}}⟩=-0.064±0.079_{stat}±0.006_{syst} for the first time, which are consistent with the theoretical calculation.

Determination of the Σ^{+} Timelike Electromagnetic Form Factors

Based on data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the process e^{+}e^{-}→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} is studied at center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=2.3960, 2.6454, and 2.9000 GeV. Using a fully differential angular description of the final state particles, both the relative magnitude and phase information of the Σ^{+} electromagnetic form factors in the timelike region are extracted. The relative phase between the electric and magnetic form factors is determined to be sinΔΦ=-0.67±0.29(stat)±0.18(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.3960  GeV, ΔΦ=55°±19°(stat)±14°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.6454  GeV, and 78°±22°(stat)±9°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.9000  GeV. For the first time, the phase of the hyperon electromagnetic form factors is explored in a wide range of four-momentum transfer. The evolution of the phase along with four-momentum transfer is an important input for understanding its asymptotic behavior and the dynamics of baryons.

First Measurement of the Decay Asymmetry in the Pure W-Boson-Exchange Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+}

Based on 4.4  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at the center-of-mass energies between 4.60 and 4.70 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the pure W-boson-exchange decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+} is studied with a full angular analysis. The corresponding decay asymmetry is measured for the first time to be α_{Ξ^{0}K^{+}}=0.01±0.16(stat)±0.03(syst). This result reflects the noninterference effect between the S- and P-wave amplitudes. The phase shift between S- and P-wave amplitudes has two solutions, which are δ_{p}-δ_{s}=-1.55±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad or 1.59±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad.

Online clinical tools to support the use of new plasma biomarker diagnostic technology in the assessment of Alzheimer's disease: a narrative review

Recent advances in new diagnostic technologies for Alzheimer's disease have improved the speed and precision of diagnosis. However, accessing the potential benefits of this technology poses challenges for clinicians, such as deciding whether it is clinically appropriate to order a diagnostic test, which specific test or tests to order and how to interpret test results and communicate these to the patient and their caregiver. Tools to support decision-making could provide additional structure and information to the clinical assessment process. These tools could be accessed online, and such 'e-tools' can provide an interactive interface to support patients and clinicians in the use of new diagnostic technologies for Alzheimer's disease. We performed a narrative review of the literature to synthesize information available on this research topic. Relevant studies that provide an understanding of how these online tools could be used to optimize the clinical utility of diagnostic technology were identified. Based on these, we discuss the ways in which e-tools have been used to assist in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and propose recommendations for future research to aid further development.

Test of CP Symmetry in Hyperon to Neutron Decays

The quantum entangled J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} pairs from (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events taken by the BESIII detector are used to study the nonleptonic two-body weak decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-}. The CP-odd weak decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} (α_{+}) and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-} (α[over ¯]_{-}) are determined to be 0.0481±0.0031_{stat}±0.0019_{syst} and -0.0565±0.0047_{stat}±0.0022_{syst}, respectively. The decay parameter α[over ¯]_{-} is measured for the first time, and the accuracy of α_{+} is improved by a factor of 4 compared to the previous results. The simultaneously determined decay parameters allow the first precision CP symmetry test for any hyperon decay with a neutron in the final state with the measurement of A_{CP}=(α_{+}+α[over ¯]_{-})/(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})=-0.080±0.052_{stat}±0.028_{syst}. Assuming CP conservation, the average decay parameter is determined as ⟨α_{+}⟩=(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})/2=-0.0506±0.0026_{stat}±0.0019_{syst}, while the ratios α_{+}/α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{-}/α[over ¯]_{0} are -0.0490±0.0032_{stat}±0.0021_{syst} and -0.0571±0.0053_{stat}±0.0032_{syst}, where α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{0} are the decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→pπ^{0} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→p[over ¯]π^{0}, respectively.

Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon

We study the process e^{+}e^{-}→Λ_{c}^{+}Λ[over ¯]_{c}^{-} at twelve center-of-mass energies from 4.6119 to 4.9509 GeV using data samples collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The Born cross sections and effective form factors (|G_{eff}|) are determined with unprecedented precision after combining the single and double-tag methods based on the decay process Λ_{c}^{+}→pK^{-}π^{+}. Flat cross sections around 4.63 GeV are obtained and no indication of the resonant structure Y(4630), as reported by Belle, is found. In addition, no oscillatory behavior is discerned in the |G_{eff}| energy dependence of Λ_{c}^{+}, in contrast to what is seen for the proton and neutron cases. Analyzing the cross section together with the polar-angle distribution of the Λ_{c}^{+} baryon at each energy point, the moduli of electric and magnetic form factors (|G_{E}| and |G_{M}|) are extracted and separated. For the first time, the energy dependence of the form factor ratio |G_{E}/G_{M}| is observed, which can be well described by an oscillatory function.

Evaluation of clinical benefits of treatments for Alzheimer's disease

The need for regulatory approval of new therapies for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease-a progressive neurodegenerative condition-has made the assessment of treatment efficacy an urgent priority for discussion and investigation in the field. In the first part of this Personal View, we summarise current views on what constitutes a clinically meaningful benefit from treatment for Alzheimer's disease, including the concept of a minimum treatment effect against which to compare trial outcomes and its limitations. Considering existing and divergent definitions of clinically meaningful change, we define this concept in the second part of the Personal View by proposing a new approach that consecutively considers whether a treatment benefit for Alzheimer's disease is noticeable, valuable, and worthwhile in the context of costs and risks. This approach could be a useful foundation from which the field can move forwards on this issue and address existing gaps in understanding.

[Prognostic analysis of patients with acute leukemia and central nervous system involvement undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To investigate the potential of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in mitigating the adverse prognosis associated with central nervous system leukemia (CNSL) and to assess the significance of prophylactic intrathecal injection. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted involving 30 patients with acute leukemia who had a history of CNSL who underwent allo-HSCT at Peking University People's Hospital between September 2012 and March 2018 (referred to as the CNSL-positive group). In addition, 90 patients with acute leukemia were selected from the same period who underwent allo-HSCT without a history of CNSL (referred to as the CNSL-negative group) and a rigorous 1∶3 matching was performed based on disease type, disease status, and transplantation type to form the control group. The prognosis between the two groups was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the high-risk factors for CNSL relapse post-transplant were identified through Cox proportional-hazards model. Results: The median age of patients in the CNSL-negative group was significantly higher than that of patients in the CNSL-positive group (32 years vs. 24 years, P=0.014). No significant differences were observed in baseline data, including sex, disease type, disease status at transplantation, donor-recipient relationship, and human leukocyte antigen consistency between the two groups. The median follow-up time was 568 days (range: 21-1 852 days). The 4-year cumulative incidence of relapse (71.4%±20.9% vs. 29.3%±11.5%, P=0.005) and the cumulative incidence of CNSL post-transplant (33.6%±9.2% vs. 1.2%±1.2%, P<0.001) were significantly higher in the CNSL-positive group than in the CNSL-negative group. Furthermore, the 4-year leukemia-free survival rate in the CNSL-positive group was significantly lower than that in the CNSL-negative group (23.1%±17.0% vs. 71.5%±11.6%, P<0.001). However, no significant differences were observed in the 4-year cumulative transplant-related mortality and overall survival rates between the two groups (both P>0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that a history of CNSL before transplantation (HR=25.050, 95%CI 3.072-204.300, P=0.003) was identified as high-risk factors for CNSL relapse post-transplant. Conversely, haploidentical transplantation was associated with a reduced risk of CNSL relapse post-transplant (HR=0.260, 95%CI 0.073-0.900, P=0.034). Within the CNSL-positive group, seven patients received prophylactic intrathecal therapy after transplantation, and their CNSL relapse rate was significantly lower than that of the 23 patients who did not receive intrathecal therapy after transplantation (0/7 vs. 9/23, P=0.048). Conclusions: Patients with a history of CNSL have a higher risk of relapse and experience poorer leukemia-free survival following transplantation. The use of prophylactic intrathecal injection shows promise in mitigating CNSL relapse rates, although further validation through prospective studies is necessary to substantiate these observations.

Determination of Spin-Parity Quantum Numbers for the Narrow Structure near the pΛ[over ¯] Threshold in e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

A narrow structure in the pΛ[over ¯] system near the mass threshold, named as X(2085), is observed in the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] with a statistical significance greater than 20σ. Its spin and parity are determined for the first time to be J^{P}=1^{+} in an amplitude analysis, with a statistical significance greater than 5σ over other quantum numbers (0^{-},1^{-} and 2^{+}). The pole positions of X(2085) are measured to be M_{pole}=(2084_{-2}^{+4}±9)  MeV and Γ_{pole}=(58_{-3}^{+4}±25)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The analysis is based on the study of the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] and uses the data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=4.008, 4.178, 4.226, 4.258, 4.416, and 4.682 GeV with a total integrated luminosity of 8.35  fb^{-1}.

Precise Measurement of the e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} Cross Sections at Center-of-Mass Energies from Threshold to 4.95 GeV

The process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} is studied with a semi-inclusive method using data samples at center-of-mass energies from threshold to 4.95 GeV collected with the BESIII detector operating at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider. The Born cross sections of the process are measured for the first time with high precision in this energy region. Two resonance structures are observed in the energy-dependent cross sections around 4.2 and 4.4 GeV. By fitting the cross sections with a coherent sum of three Breit-Wigner amplitudes and one phase-space amplitude, the two significant structures are assigned masses of (4186.8±8.7±30) and (4414.6±3.4±6.1)  MeV/c^{2}, widths of (55±15±53) and (122.5±7.5±8.1)  MeV, where the first errors are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The inclusion of a third Breit-Wigner amplitude is necessary to describe a structure around 4.79 GeV.

Heart rate variability and risk of agitation in Alzheimer's disease: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study

Agitation in Alzheimer's disease is common and may be related to impaired emotion regulation capacity. Heart rate variability, a proposed index of autonomic and emotion regulation neural network integrity, could be associated with agitation propensity in Alzheimer's disease. We used the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study cohort data, collected over seven visits spanning over two decades, to investigate whether heart rate variability (change) was associated with agitation risk in individuals clinically diagnosed with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Agitation (absence/presence) at Visit 5, the primary outcome, was based on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory agitation/aggression subscale, or a composite score comprising the total number of agitation/aggression, irritability, disinhibition and aberrant motor behaviour subscales present. Visit 1-5 heart rate variability measures were the log-transformed root mean square of successive differences in R-R intervals and standard deviation of normal-to-normal R-R intervals obtained from resting, supine, standard 12-lead ECGs. To aid interpretability, heart rate variability data were scaled such that model outputs were expressed for each 0.05 log-unit change in heart rate variability (which approximated to the observed difference in heart rate variability with every 5 years of age). Among 456 participants who had dementia, 120 were clinically classified to have dementia solely attributable to Alzheimer's disease. This group showed a positive relationship between heart rate variability and agitation risk in regression models, which was strongest for measures of (potentially vagally mediated) heart rate variability change over the preceding two decades. Here, a 0.05 log-unit of heart rate variability change was associated with an up to 10-fold increase in the odds of agitation and around a half-unit increase in the composite agitation score. Associations persisted after controlling for participants' cognitive status, heart rate (change), sociodemographic factors, co-morbidities and medications with autonomic effects. Further confirmatory studies, incorporating measures of emotion regulation, are needed to support heart rate variability indices as potential agitation propensity markers in Alzheimer's disease and to explore underlying mechanisms as targets for treatment development.

First Experimental Study of the Purely Leptonic Decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}

Using 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we report the first experimental study of the purely leptonic decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}. Our data contain a signal of this decay with a statistical significance of 2.9σ. The branching fraction of D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e} is measured to be (2.1_{-0.9_{stat}}^{+1.2}±0.2_{syst})×10^{-5}, corresponding to an upper limit of 4.0×10^{-5} at the 90% confidence level. Taking the total width of the D_{s}^{*+} [(0.070±0.028)  keV] predicted with the radiative D_{s}^{*+} decay from the lattice QCD calculation as input, the decay constant of the D_{s}^{*+} is determined to be f_{D_{s}^{*+}}=(214_{-46_{stat}}^{+61}±44_{syst})  MeV, corresponding to an upper limit of 354 MeV at the 90% confidence level.

[Safety and survival analysis of haplo-identical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with severe aplastic anemia who had previous failure to antithymoglobulin treatment]

Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of haplo-identical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (haplo-HSCT) conditioning with the same dosage form of antithymoglobulin (ATG) in patients with severe aplastic anemia (SAA) failure to ATG. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. A total of 65 patients with SAA who failed ATG treatment and received haplo-HSCT conditioning with the same dosage of ATG at the Institute of Hematology, Peking University People's Hospital between July 2008 and October 2020 were included as the ATG treatment failure group. An additional 65 SAA patients who applied ATG for the first time during haplo-HSCT were randomly selected by stratified sampling as the first-line haplo-HSCT group. Baseline clinical data and follow-up data of the two groups were collected. Conditioning-related toxicity within 10 days after ATG application and long-term prognosis were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier was used to calculate the overall survival rate, and the Log-rank test was applied to compare the rates of the two groups. Results: In the ATG treatment failure group, there were 36 males and 29 females, and the age at the time of transplantation [M (Q1, Q3)] was 16 (8, 25) years. In the first-line haplo-HSCT group, there were 35 males and 30 females, with a median age of 17 (7, 26) years. Within 10 days of ATG application, the incidence of noninfectious fever, noninfectious diarrhea, and liver injury in the ATG treatment failure group was 78% (51 cases), 45% (29 cases), and 28% (18 cases), respectively, and in the first-line haplo-HSCT group was 74% (48 cases), 54% (35 cases), and 25% (16 cases), respectively; the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant for any of these three parameters (all P>0.05). For graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), there was no significant difference between the ATG treatment failure group and the first-line haplo-HSCT group in the development of 100 day Ⅱ to Ⅳ acute GVHD (29.51%±0.35% vs. 25.42%±0.33%), Ⅲ to Ⅳ acute GVHD (6.56%±0.10% vs. 6.78%±0.11%), and 3-year chronic GVHD (26.73%±0.36% vs. 21.15%±0.30%) (all P>0.05). Three-year overall survival (79.6%±5.1% vs. 84.6%±4.5%) and 3-year failure-free survival (79.6%±5.1% vs. 81.5%±4.8%) were also comparable between these two groups (both P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with no exposure to ATG before HSCT, similar early adverse effects and comparable survival outcomes were achieved in patients with SAA who failed previous ATG treatment and received haplo-HSCT conditioning with the same dosage form of ATG. This might indicate that previous failure of ATG treatment does not significantly impact the efficacy and safety of salvaging haplo-HSCT in patients with SAA.

Search for Λ[over ¯]-Λ Baryon-Number-Violating Oscillations in the Decay J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

We report on the first search for Λ[over ¯]-Λ oscillations in the decay J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c. by analyzing 1.31×10^{9}  J/ψ events accumulated with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The J/ψ events are produced using e^{+}e^{-} collisions at a center of mass energy sqrt[s]=3.097  GeV. No evidence for hyperon oscillations is observed. The upper limit for the oscillation rate of Λ[over ¯] to Λ hyperons is determined to be P(Λ)=[B(J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ+c.c.)/B(J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c.)]<4.4×10^{-6} corresponding to an oscillation parameter δm_{ΛΛ[over ¯]} of less than 3.8×10^{-18}  GeV at the 90% confidence level.

[Clinical significance of Epstein-Barr Virus detection in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To analyze the detection rate, clinical significance, and prognosis of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 1100 patients who underwent the CSF virus test after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Peking University People's Hospital between January 2017 and June 2022. Among them, 19 patients were screened positive for EBV in their CSF, and their clinical characteristics, treatment, and prognosis were analyzed. Results: Among 19 patients with EBV-positive cerebrospinal fluid, 12 were male and 7 were female, with 5 patients aged <18 years and 12 aged ≥18 years, with a median age of 27 (5-58) years old. There were 7 cases of acute myeloid leukemia, 8 of acute lymphocytic leukemia, 2 of aplastic anemia, 1 of Hodgkin's lymphoma, and 1 of hemophagocytic syndrome. All 19 patients underwent haploid hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, including 1 secondary transplant. Nineteen patients had neurological symptoms (headache, dizziness, convulsions, or seizures), of which 13 had fever. Ten cases showed no abnormalities in cranial imaging examination. Among the 19 patients, 6 were diagnosed with EB virus-related central nervous system diseases, with a median diagnosis time of 50 (22-363) days after transplantation. In 9 (47.3%) patients, EBV was detected in their peripheral blood, and they were treated with intravenous infusion of rituximab (including two patients who underwent lumbar puncture and intrathecal injection of rituximab). After treatment, EBV was not detected in seven patients. Among the 19 patients, 2 died from EBV infection and 2 from other causes. Conclusion: In patients who exhibited central nervous system symptoms after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, EBV should be screened as a potential pathogen. EBV detected in the CSF may indicate an infection; however, it does not confirm the diagnosis.

[Clinical analysis of the usefulness of letermovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To analyze the efficacy and safety of letermovir in primary prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation in patients receiving haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Methods: This retrospective, cohort study was conducted using data of patients who underwent haploidentical transplantation at Peking University Institute of Hematology and received letermovir for primary prophylaxis between May 1, 2022 and August 30, 2022. The inclusion criteria of the letermovir group were as follows: letermovir initiation within 30 days after transplantation and continuation for≥90 days after transplantation. Patients who underwent haploidentical transplantation within the same time period but did not receive letermovir prophylaxis were selected in a 1∶4 ratio as controls. The main outcomes were the incidence of CMV infection and CMV disease after transplantation as well as the possible effects of letermovir on acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD), non-relapse mortality (NRM), and bone marrow suppression. Categorical variables were analyzed by chi-square test, and continuous variables were analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for evaluating incidence differences. Results: Seventeen patients were included in the letermovir prophylaxis group. The median patient age in the letermovir group was significantly greater than that in the control group (43 yr vs. 15 yr; Z=-4.28, P<0.001). The two groups showed no significant difference in sex distribution and primary diseases, etc. (all P>0.05). The proportion of CMV-seronegative donors was significantly higher in the letermovir prophylaxis group in comparison with the control group (8/17 vs. 0/68, χ²=35.32, P<0.001). Three out of the 17 patients in the letermovir group experienced CMV reactivation, which was significantly lower than the incidence of CMV reactivation in the control group (3/17 vs. 40/68, χ²=9.23, P=0.002), and no CMV disease development observed in the letermovir group. Letermovir showed no significant effects on platelet engraftment (P=0.105), aGVHD (P=0.348), and 100-day NRM (P=0.474). Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest that letermovir may effectively reduce the incidence of CMV infection after haploidentical transplantation without influencing aGVHD, NRM, and bone marrow suppression. Prospective randomized controlled studies are required to further verify these findings.

Has COVID-19 affected dementia diagnosis rates in England?

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted on the provision of care and routine activity of all National Health Service (NHS) services. While General Practitioner referrals to memory services in England have returned to pre-pandemic levels, the estimated dementia diagnosis rate (DDR) fell by 5.4% between March 2020 and February 2023.

METHODS

In this paper we explore whether this reduction is accurate or is an artefact of the way the NHS collects data.

RESULTS

We explore the processes that may have affected national dementia diagnosis rates during and following the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

We discuss what action could be taken to improve the DDR in the future.

First Study of Reaction Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p Using Ξ^{0}-Nucleus Scattering at an Electron-Positron Collider

Using (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring, the process Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p is studied, where the Ξ^{0} baryon is produced in the process J/ψ→Ξ^{0}Ξ[over ¯]^{0} and the neutron is a component of the ^{9}Be, ^{12}C, and ^{197}Au nuclei in the beam pipe. A clear signal is observed with a statistical significance of 7.1σ. The cross section of the reaction Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be is determined to be σ(Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be)=(22.1±5.3_{stat}±4.5_{sys})  mb at the Ξ^{0} momentum of 0.818  GeV/c, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. No significant H-dibaryon signal is observed in the Ξ^{-}p final state. This is the first study of hyperon-nucleon interactions in electron-positron collisions and opens up a new direction for such research.

Measurements of Normalized Differential Cross Sections of Inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} Production in e^{+}e^{-} Annihilation at Energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV

Based on electron positron collision data collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage rings, the differential cross sections of inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} production as a function of hadron momentum, normalized by the total cross section of the e^{+}e^{-}→hadrons process, are measured at six center-of-mass energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV. Our results, which cover a relative hadron energy range from 0.1 to 0.9, significantly deviate from several theoretical calculations based on existing fragmentation functions.

Key questions for the evaluation of anti-amyloid immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease

The clinical benefit associated with anti-amyloid immunotherapies, a new class of drugs for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, is predicated on their ability to modify disease course by lowering brain amyloid levels. At the time of writing, two amyloid-lowering antibodies, aducanumab and lecanemab, have obtained United States Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval, with further agents of this class in the Alzheimer's disease treatment pipeline. Based on limited published clinical trial data to date, regulators, payors and physicians will need to assess their efficacy, clinical effectiveness and safety, as well as cost and accessibility. We propose that attention to three important questions related to treatment efficacy, clinical effectiveness and safety should guide evidence-based consideration of this important class of drugs. These are: (1) Were trial statistical analyses appropriate and did they convincingly support claims of efficacy? (2) Do reported treatment effects outweigh safety concerns and are they generalizable to a representative clinical population of people with Alzheimer's disease? and (3) Do the data convincingly demonstrate disease course modification, suggesting that increasing clinical benefits beyond the duration of the trials are likely? We suggest specific approaches to interpreting trial results for these drugs and highlight important areas of uncertainty where additional data and a cautious interpretation of existing results is warranted. Safe, effective and accessible treatments for Alzheimer's disease are eagerly awaited by millions of patients and their caregivers worldwide. While amyloid-targeting immunotherapies may be promising disease-modifying Alzheimer's disease treatments, rigorous and unbiased assessment of clinical trial data is critical to regulatory decision-making and subsequently determining their provision and utility in routine clinical practice. Our recommendations provide a framework for evidence-based appraisal of these drugs by regulators, payors, physicians and patients.

Precision Measurement of the Decay Σ^{+}→pγ in the Process J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-}

Using (10 087±44)×10^{6} J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, the radiative hyperon decay Σ^{+}→pγ is studied at an electron-positron collider experiment for the first time. The absolute branching fraction is measured to be (0.996±0.021_{stat}±0.018_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is lower than its world average value by 4.2 standard deviations. Its decay asymmetry parameter is determined to be -0.652±0.056_{stat}±0.020_{syst}. The branching fraction and decay asymmetry parameter are the most precise to date, and the accuracies are improved by 78% and 34%, respectively.

Priorities for research on neuromodulatory subcortical systems in Alzheimer's disease: Position paper from the NSS PIA of ISTAART

The neuromodulatory subcortical system (NSS) nuclei are critical hubs for survival, hedonic tone, and homeostasis. Tau-associated NSS degeneration occurs early in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis, long before the emergence of pathognomonic memory dysfunction and cortical lesions. Accumulating evidence supports the role of NSS dysfunction and degeneration in the behavioral and neuropsychiatric manifestations featured early in AD. Experimental studies even suggest that AD-associated NSS degeneration drives brain neuroinflammatory status and contributes to disease progression, including the exacerbation of cortical lesions. Given the important pathophysiologic and etiologic roles that involve the NSS in early AD stages, there is an urgent need to expand our understanding of the mechanisms underlying NSS vulnerability and more precisely detail the clinical progression of NSS changes in AD. Here, the NSS Professional Interest Area of the International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment highlights knowledge gaps about NSS within AD and provides recommendations for priorities specific to clinical research, biomarker development, modeling, and intervention. HIGHLIGHTS: Neuromodulatory nuclei degenerate in early Alzheimer's disease pathological stages. Alzheimer's pathophysiology is exacerbated by neuromodulatory nuclei degeneration. Neuromodulatory nuclei degeneration drives neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Biomarkers of neuromodulatory integrity would be value-creating for dementia care. Neuromodulatory nuclei present strategic prospects for disease-modifying therapies.

[Dynamic monitoring of plasma Epstein-Barr Virus DNA load can predict the occurrence of lymphoproliferative disorders after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To determine the optimal cutoff value of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA load that can assist in the diagnosis of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (haplo-HSCT) . Methods: The data of patients with EBV infection after haplo-HSCT from January to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Through constructing the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calculating the Youden index to determine the cutoff value of EBV-DNA load and its duration of diagnostic significance for PTLD. Results: A total of 94 patients were included, of whom 20 (21.3% ) developed PTLD, with a median onset time of 56 (40-309) d after transplantation. The median EBV value at the time of diagnosis of PTLD was 70,400 (1,710-1,370,000) copies/ml, and the median duration of EBV viremia was 23.5 (4-490) d. Binary logistic regression was used to analyze the peak EBV-DNA load (the EBV-DNA load at the time of diagnosis in the PTLD group) and duration of EBV viremia between the PTLD and non-PTLD groups. The results showed that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P=0.018 and P=0.001) . The ROC curve was constructed to calculate the Youden index, and it was concluded that the EBV-DNA load ≥ 41 850 copies/ml after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation had diagnostic significance for PTLD (AUC=0.847) , and the sensitivity and specificity were 0.611 and 0.932, respectively. The duration of EBV viremia of ≥20.5 d had diagnostic significance for PTLD (AUC=0.833) , with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.778 and 0.795, respectively. Conclusion: Dynamic monitoring of EBV load in high-risk patients with PTLD after haplo-HSCT and attention to its duration have important clinical significance, which can help clinically predict the occurrence of PTLD in advance and take early intervention measures.

Measurements of the Electric and Magnetic Form Factors of the Neutron for Timelike Momentum Transfer

We present the first measurements of the electric and magnetic form factors of the neutron in the timelike (positive q^{2}) region as function of four-momentum transfer. We explored the differential cross sections of the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→n[over ¯]n with data collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII accelerator, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 354.6  pb^{-1} in total at twelve center-of-mass energies between sqrt[s]=2.0-2.95  GeV. A relative uncertainty of 18% and 12% for the electric and magnetic form factors, respectively, is achieved at sqrt[s]=2.3935  GeV. Our results are comparable in accuracy to those from electron scattering in the comparable spacelike region of four-momentum transfer. The electromagnetic form factor ratio R_{em}≡|G_{E}|/|G_{M}| is within the uncertainties close to unity. We compare our result on |G_{E}| and |G_{M}| to recent model predictions, and the measurements in the spacelike region to test the analyticity of electromagnetic form factors.

[Incidence and clinical characteristics of engraftment syndrome after syngeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematological diseases]

Objective: To explore the incidence and clinical characteristics of engraftment syndrome (ES) after syngeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (syn-HSCT) in patients with hematological diseases. Methods: The clinical data of 21 patients who received syn-HSCT at People's Hospital of Peking University from January 1994 to May 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Seven (33.3% ) of 21 patients developed ES. The onset of ES symptoms occurred at a median of 8 (range: 5-13) days after HSCT, and the diagnosis of ES occurred at a median of 10 (range: 7-14) days after HSCT. Steroids were administered immediately after the diagnosis of ES, the median time of symptom continuance was 2 (range: 1-5) days, and all patients showed complete resolution of ES symptoms. In the multivariate analysis, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and faster neutrophil reconstitution were the risk factors for ES (HR=15.298, 95% CI 1.486-157.501, P=0.022, and HR=17.459, 95% CI 1.776-171.687, P=0.014) . Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in the overall survival and disease-free survival between patients with ES and those without ES. Conclusion: A high incidence of ES was observed in syn-HSCT recipients. Moreover, the prognosis of ES was excellent.

Observation of a New X(3872) Production Process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872)

Using 4.7  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data at center-of-mass energies from 4.661 to 4.951 GeV collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we observe the X(3872) production process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) for the first time. The significance is 7.8σ, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) Born cross section and the corresponding upper limit at 90% confidence level at each energy point are reported. The line shape of the cross section indicates that the ωX(3872) signals may be from the decays of some nontrivial structures.

Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with J^{PC}=1^{--} in e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+}

The Born cross sections of the process e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} at center-of-mass energies from 4.189 to 4.951 GeV are measured for the first time. The data samples used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 17.9  fb^{-1} and were collected by the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring. Three enhancements around 4.20, 4.47, and 4.67 GeV are visible. The resonances have masses of 4209.6±4.7±5.9  MeV/c^{2}, 4469.1±26.2±3.6  MeV/c^{2}, and 4675.3±29.5±3.5  MeV/c^{2} and widths of 81.6±17.8±9.0  MeV, 246.3±36.7±9.4  MeV, and 218.3±72.9±9.3  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. The first and third resonances are consistent with the ψ(4230) and ψ(4660) states, respectively, while the second one is compatible with the ψ(4500) observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→K^{+}K^{-}J/ψ process. These three charmoniumlike ψ states are observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} process for the first time.

Rates of Antipsychotic Drug Prescribing Among People Living With Dementia During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Concerns have been raised that the use of antipsychotic medication for people living with dementia might have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective

To examine multinational trends in antipsychotic drug prescribing for people living with dementia before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multinational network cohort study used electronic health records and claims data from 8 databases in 6 countries (France, Germany, Italy, South Korea, the UK, and the US) for individuals aged 65 years or older between January 1, 2016, and November 30, 2021. Two databases each were included for South Korea and the US.

Exposures

The introduction of population-wide COVID-19 restrictions from April 2020 to the latest available date of each database.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were yearly and monthly incidence of dementia diagnosis and prevalence of people living with dementia who were prescribed antipsychotic drugs in each database. Interrupted time series analyses were used to quantify changes in prescribing rates before and after the introduction of population-wide COVID-19 restrictions.

Results

A total of 857 238 people with dementia aged 65 years or older (58.0% female) were identified in 2016. Reductions in the incidence of dementia were observed in 7 databases in the early phase of the pandemic (April, May, and June 2020), with the most pronounced reduction observed in 1 of the 2 US databases (rate ratio [RR], 0.30; 95% CI, 0.27-0.32); reductions were also observed in the total number of people with dementia prescribed antipsychotic drugs in France, Italy, South Korea, the UK, and the US. Rates of antipsychotic drug prescribing for people with dementia increased in 6 databases representing all countries. Compared with the corresponding month in 2019, the most pronounced increase in 2020 was observed in May in South Korea (Kangwon National University database) (RR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.47-3.02) and June in the UK (RR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.24-3.09). The rates of antipsychotic drug prescribing in these 6 databases remained high in 2021. Interrupted time series analyses revealed immediate increases in the prescribing rate in Italy (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.08-1.58) and in the US Medicare database (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.20-1.71) after the introduction of COVID-19 restrictions.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found converging evidence that the rate of antipsychotic drug prescribing to people with dementia increased in the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the 6 countries studied and did not decrease to prepandemic levels after the acute phase of the pandemic had ended. These findings suggest that the pandemic disrupted the care of people living with dementia and that the development of intervention strategies is needed to ensure the quality of care.

Evidence for the Cusp Effect in η' Decays into ηπ^{0}π^{0}

Using a sample of 4.3×10^{5} η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} events selected from the ten billion J/ψ event dataset collected with the BESIII detector, we study the decay η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} within the framework of nonrelativistic effective field theory. Evidence for a structure at π^{+}π^{-} mass threshold is observed in the invariant mass spectrum of π^{0}π^{0} with a statistical significance of around 3.5σ, which is consistent with the cusp effect as predicted by the nonrelativistic effective field theory. After introducing the amplitude for describing the cusp effect, the ππ scattering length combination a_{0}-a_{2} is determined to be 0.226±0.060_{stat}±0.013_{syst}, which is in good agreement with theoretical calculation of 0.2644±0.0051.

[Clinical analysis of 11 patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma in maxillofacial region]

Objective: To investigate the clinicopathological features, treatment and prognosis of maxillofacial neuroendocrine carcinoma. Methods: A total of 11 patients with maxillofacial neuroendocrine carcinoma diagnosed in the Department of Pathology of The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from December 2010 to July 2022 were retrospectively enrolled, including 8 males and 3 females, aged (65.2±9.5) years (ranged from 49 to 87 years), with a disease course of 0.5 to 6.0 months. The clinicopathological data including head and neck CT, MRI and treatment methods were analyzed. Results: Submandibular gland and maxilla were involved in 3 cases, parapharynx in 2 cases, and face, tongue root and soft palate in 1 case respectively. Clinically, the initial symptom is a rapidly growing painless or tender mass, which may be accompanied by restricted mouth opening, dysphagia, and local numbness after invasion of masticatory muscles and nerves. The tumors were all invasive and low-density, with unclear boundaries from the surrounding tissues. Among the patients, 9 received surgical treatment, and 5 received adjuvant treatment after surgery (2 received chemotherapy, 3 received radiotherapy+chemotherapy). According to the 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification of head and neck tumors in 2022, there were 1 case (1/11) with poorly differentiated large cells and 10 cases (10/11) with poorly differentiated small cells. Histologically, the macrocell type is composed of large cells with rough chromatin, obvious vacuolar nucleolus, protruding nucleolus, and necrosis. The small cell type is dominated by small blue round cells with neuroendocrine characteristics, with active growth and multifocal necrosis. Immunohistochemical staining showed that cytokeratin (CK), epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) and synaptophysin (Syn) were diffusively expressed, 10 cases expressed CD56, 8 cases expressed p63, 6 cases expressed weakly punctated chromograin-A (CgA), and S-100 was not expressed. The Ki-67 index ranges from 20 to 90 percent. By the end of follow-up (0.5 to 127.0 months), 3 patients were alive, and the mean progression-free survival (21.0 months) of postoperative chemoradiotherapy patients was significantly longer than that of surgery and/or chemotherapy alone (3.3 months). Conclusions: Maxillofacial neuroendocrine carcinoma is characterized by low differentiation of small cells, high degree of malignancy and poor prognosis. Radical surgery combined with chemoradiotherapy has better local control effect.

Clinical utility of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in the evaluation of cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The analytical and clinical validity of cerebrospinal (CSF) biomarkers has been extensively researched in dementia. Further work is needed to assess the ability of these biomarkers to improve diagnosis, management and health outcomes in the clinical setting OBJECTIVES: To assess the added value and clinical utility of CSF biomarkers in the diagnostic assessment of cognitively impaired patients under evaluation for Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

Systematic literature searches of Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science research databases were conducted on 17 December 2022. Data from relevant studies were extracted and independently screened for quality using a tool for bias. Clinical utility was measured by clinicians' changes in diagnosis, diagnostic confidence and patient management (when available), after their examination of patients' CSF biomarkers. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by consideration of additional cost per patient and quality-adjusted life years.

RESULTS

Searches identified 17 studies comprising 2090 patient participants and 593 clinicians. The meta-analysis revealed that clinicians' use of CSF biomarkers resulted in a pooled percentage change in diagnosis of 25% (95% CI 14 to 37), an increase in diagnostic confidence of 14% (95% CI 9 to 18) and a pooled proportion of patients whose management changed of 31% (95% CI 12 to 50). CSF biomarkers were deemed cost-effective, particularly in memory services, where pre-test AD prevalence is higher compared with a primary care setting.

CONCLUSIONS

CSF biomarkers can be a helpful additional diagnostic tool for clinicians assessing patients with cognitive impairment. In particular, CSF biomarkers consistently improved clinicians' confidence in diagnosing AD and influenced on diagnostic change and patient management. Further research is needed to study the clinical utility of blood-based biomarkers in the clinical setting.

Cardiac tamponade in a multiracial population- epidemiology, clinical characteristics and survival outcomes - a single centre experience

Funding Acknowledgements

Type of funding sources: None.

Background

Cardiac tamponade is a medical emergency which requires prompt medical intervention via pericardiocentesis. Diverse etiologies has been attributed, with malignancy and Tuberculous effusions being the leading causes. The aim of this study is to compare clinical characteristics and survival outcome in a multiethnic Asian centre.

Methods

We performed a single centre retrospective analysis in a hospital in Malaysia. All patients who are acutely presenting with echocardiographic cardiac tamponade between January 2013 to July 2022 were included in this study. Demographic details, clinical presentations, echographic findings, fluid analysis procedural details, and complications were obtained via electronic medical records. Data were analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 26 Software.

Results

Of the 6015 patients admitted to our CCU over 9 years, we identified 46 patients fulfilling criteria of tamponade, representing about 0.8% of total admission. Mean age of our cases are 44.59 (±16.48).Males represent 60.9%( n=28) of our cases with Malay race forming nearly 54.3% ( n=25), followed by Chinese, 28.3% ( n= 13). Orthopnea was the commonest clinical manifestation representing 89.1%,followed by tachypnoea ( 69.6% ),fever (69.6%, cough ( 63%,) , and pleuritic chest pain (26.1%.) Malignancy forms the bulk of our cases (60.9%, n= 28), with lung malignancy being the commonest ( 42%, n= 12), followed by breast ( 25%, n= 7), and lymphoma (17.9%, n= 5). Other aetiologies includes infective cause (15.2% , n= 7), with Tuberculosis being the predominant cause, Uremic effusion (10.86 %, n= 5) and rheumatological effusion ( 6.5%, n= 3). Complications occurred in 34.8 % ( n=16) of our cases, with mortality reaching up to 43.8% ( n=7). No significant association seen between Race, tamponade size, amount drained and drainage duration among the oncology vs non oncologic groups ( P value &gt;0.005). The median survival time is 28 days (SE=1.23) for oncology patients and 52 days (0.0) for non-oncology patients at 1 year. Log-rank test indicated that survival experience is significantly different (p&lt; 0.048) between groups in one year outcome. Lymphoma patients have better median survival rate than breast cancer patients (P=0.014)

Conclusion

Malignancy is the commonest cause of Cardiac Tamponade at our centre. Lymphoma patients with tamponade fare better compared to other forms of malignancy, with breast cancer patient faring the worst.

[Clinical analysis of the efficacies of ganciclovir plus foscarnet and a single antiviral drug for the treatment of cytomegalovirus infection after haploidentical stem cell transplantation]

Objective: To evaluate and compare the efficacies of ganciclovir plus foscarnet and a single agent for the treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Methods: This study was a non-randomized clinical controlled trial. The data of patients who underwent haploidentical transplantation and developed CMV infection between January 1, 2021, and June 30, 2021, were retrospectively analyzed. Follow-up was conducted through telephone, inpatient consultations, and the review of outpatient medical records. The observed indicators included the incidence of CMV infection (including CMV disease), rate of recurrence of CMV infection, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: A total of 242 patients were diagnosed with post-transplantation CMV infection; 116 patients tested positive for CMV DNA for more than 14 days (P=0.011). Of the 242 patients with CMV infection, 65 were treated with ganciclovir plus foscarnet, and 156 patients were treated with a single antiviral drug; the median durations of CMV seroconversion were 21 (3-60) and 14 (3-32) days for the combination and single-drug groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between their incidence of CMV infections and 1-year OS and DFS. Of the patients with refractory CMV infections, 53 (45.7%) were treated with ganciclovir plus foscarnet, and 63 (54.3%) were treated with a single antiviral agent. The median durations of CMV seroconversion for the combination and single-drug groups were 21 (15-60) days and 20 (15-45) days, respectively (P=0.472). Two patients in each group progressed to CMV disease (P=0.860). During follow-up, 12 patients (22.6%) in the combination group and 8 patients (12.7%) in the single-drug group experienced recurrent episode(s) of CMV infection (P=0.158). The 1-year OS of the combination and single-drug groups were 92.0% and 87.1%, respectively (P=0.543); the 1-year DFS were 90.3% and 85.7%, respectively (P=0.665). Univariate analysis revealed no associations between the antiviral agents used and OS and DFS (OS: HR=0.644, P=0.547; DFS: HR=0.757, P=0.666). Conclusions: There were no significant differences in the duration of CMV infection, incidence of CMV disease, rate of recurrence of CMV infection, and survival of the patients treated with the combination of antiviral drugs and a single antiviral drug.

Study of the Semileptonic Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}

The study of the Cabibbo-favored semileptonic decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e} is reported using a 4.5  fb^{-1} data sample of e^{+}e^{-} annihilations collected at center-of-mass energies ranging from 4.600 GeV to 4.699 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fraction of the decay is measured to be B(Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e})=(3.56±0.11_{stat}±0.07_{syst})%, which is the most precise measurement to date. Furthermore, we perform an investigation of the internal dynamics in Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}. We provide the first direct comparisons of the differential decay rate and form factors with those predicted from lattice quantum chromodynamics (LQCD) calculations. Combining the measured branching fraction with a q^{2}-integrated rate predicted by LQCD, we determine |V_{cs}|=0.936±0.017_{B}±0.024_{LQCD}±0.007_{τ_{Λ_{c}}}.

Measurement of the Absolute Branching Fraction and Decay Asymmetry of Λ→nγ

The radiative hyperon decay Λ→nγ is studied using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at BEPCII. The absolute branching fraction of the decay Λ→nγ is determined to be (0.832±0.038_{stat}±0.054_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is a factor of 2.1 lower and 5.6 standard deviations different than the previous measurement. By analyzing the joint angular distribution of the decay products, the first determination of the decay asymmetry α_{γ} is reported with a value of -0.16±0.10_{stat}±0.05_{syst}.

Observation of an Isoscalar Resonance with Exotic J^{PC}=1^{-+} Quantum Numbers in J/ψ→γηη^{'}

Using a sample of (10.09±0.04)×10^{9}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring, a partial wave analysis of the decay J/ψ→γηη^{'} is performed. The first observation of an isoscalar state with exotic quantum numbers J^{PC}=1^{-+}, denoted as η_{1}(1855), is reported in the process J/ψ→γη_{1}(1855) with η_{1}(1855)→ηη^{'}. Its mass and width are measured to be (1855±9_{-1}^{+6})  MeV/c^{2} and (188±18_{-8}^{+3})  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second are systematic, and its statistical significance is estimated to be larger than 19σ.

Observation of an a_{0}-like State with Mass of 1.817 GeV in the Study of D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} Decays

Using e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6.32  fb^{-1} collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.178 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we perform the first amplitude analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} and determine the relative branching fractions and phases for intermediate processes. We observe an a_{0}-like state with mass of 1.817 GeV in its decay to K_{S}^{0}K^{+} for the first time. In addition, we measure the ratio {B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{*}(892)^{0}K^{+}]/B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{0}K^{*}(892)^{+}]} to be 2.35_{-0.23stat}^{+0.42}±0.10_{syst}. Finally, we provide a precision measurement of the absolute branching fraction B(D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0})=(1.46±0.06_{stat}±0.05_{syst})%.

How can secondary dementia prevention trials of Alzheimer's disease be clinically meaningful?

After clinical trial failures in symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD), our field has moved to earlier intervention in cognitively normal individuals with biomarker evidence of AD. This offers potential for dementia prevention, but mainly low and variable rates of progression to AD dementia reduce the usefulness of trials' data in decision making by potential prescribers. With results from several Phase 3 secondary prevention studies anticipated within the next few years and the Food and Drug Administration's recent endorsement of amyloid beta as a surrogate outcome biomarker for AD clinical trials, it is time to question the clinical significance of changes in biomarkers, adequacy of current trial durations, and criteria for treatment success if cognitively unimpaired patients and their doctors are to meaningfully evaluate the potential value of new agents. We argue for a change of direction toward trial designs that can unambiguously inform clinical decision making about dementia risk and progression.