Humans differ from other primates in their significantly lengthened growth period. The persistence of a fetal pattern of brain growth after birth is another important feature of human development. Here we present the results of an analysis of the 1.8-million-year-old Mojokerto child (Perning 1, Java), the only well preserved skull of a Homo erectus infant, by computed tomography. Comparison with a large series of extant humans and chimpanzees indicates that this individual was about 1 yr (0-1.5 yr) old at death and had an endocranial capacity at 72-84% of an average adult H. erectus. This pattern of relative brain growth resembles that of living apes, but differs from that seen in extant humans. It implies that major differences in the development of cognitive capabilities existed between H. erectus and anatomically modern humans.

Background Iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media (ICM; GBCM) induce immediate hypersensitivity (IH) reactions. Differentiating allergic from non-allergic IH is crucial; allergy contraindicates the culprit agent for life. We studied frequency of allergic IH among ICM or GBCM reactors. Methods Patients were recruited in 31 hospitals between 2005 and 2009. Clinical symptoms, plasma histamine and tryptase concentrations and skin tests were recorded. Allergic IH was diagnosed by intradermal tests (IDT) with the culprit CM diluted 1:10, “potentially allergic” IH by positive IDT with pure CM, and non-allergic IH by negative IDT. Findings Among 245 skin-tested patients (ICM = 209; GBCM = 36), allergic IH to ICM was identified in 41 (19.6%) and to GBCM in 10 (27.8%). Skin cross-reactivity was observed in 11 patients with ICM (26.8%) and 5 with GBCM (50%). Allergy frequency increased with clinical severity and histamine and tryptase concentrations (p < 0.0001). Cardiovascular signs were strongly associated with allergy. Non-allergic IH was observed in 152 patients (62%) (ICM:134; GBCM:18). Severity grade was lower (p < 0.0001) and reaction delay longer (11.6 vs 5.6 min; p < 0.001). Potentially allergic IH was diagnosed in 42 patients (17.1%) (ICM:34; GBCM:8). The delay, severity grade, and mediator release were intermediate between the two other groups. Interpretation Allergic IH accounted for < 10% of cutaneous reactions, and > 50% of life-threatening ones. GBCM and ICM triggered comparable IH reactions in frequency and severity. Cross-reactivity was frequent, especially for GBCM. We propose considering skin testing with pure contrast agent, as it is more sensitive than the usual 1:10 dilution criteria.

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical usefulness of ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (USPIO) MR contrast media (Sinerem, Guerbet Laboratories, Aulnay-sous-Bois, France) with precontrast MRI in the diagnosis of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, using histology as gold standard. Eighty-one previously untreated patients were enrolled in a multicenter phase-III clinical trial. All patients had a noncontrast MR, a Sinerem MR, and surgery within a period of 15 days. The MR exams were analyzed both on site and by two independent radiologists (centralized readers). Correlation between histology and imaging was done per lymph node groups, and per individual lymph nodes when the short axis was > or = 10 mm. For individual lymph nodes, Sinerem MR showed a high sensitivity (> or = 88%) and specificity (> or = 77%). For lymph node groups, the sensitivity was > or = 59% and specificity > or = 81%. False-positive results were partially due to inflammatory nodes; false-negative results from the presence of undetected micrometastases. Errors of interpretation were also related to motion and/or susceptibility artifacts and problems of zone assignment. Sinerem MR had a negative predictive value (NPV) > or = 90% and a positive predictive value (PPV) > or = 51%. The specificity and PPV of Sinerem MR were better than those of precontrast MR. Precontrast MR showed an unexpectedly high sensitivity and NPV which were not increased with Sinerem MR. The potential contribution of Sinerem MR still remains limited by technical problems regarding motion and susceptibility artifacts and spatial resolution. It is also noteworthy that logistical problems, which could reduce the practical value of Sinerem MR, will be minimized in the future since Sinerem MR alone performed as good as the combination of precontrast and Sinerem MR.

No abstract

No abstract