Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (≥65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0-100 based on the 2·5th and 97·5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target-1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023-we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45·8 (95% uncertainty interval 44·2-47·5) in 1990 to 60·3 (58·7-61·9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2·6% [1·9-3·3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010-2019 relative to 1990-2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0·79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach $1398 pooled health spending per capita (US$ adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388·9 million (358·6-421·3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3·1 billion (3·0-3·2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968·1 million [903·5-1040·3]) residing in south Asia. The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people-the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close-or how far-all populations are in benefiting from UHC. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

After more than a century from its discovery, valproic acid (VPA) still represents one of the most efficient antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Pre and post-synaptic effects of VPA depend on a very broad spectrum of actions, including the regulation of ionic currents and the facilitation of GABAergic over glutamatergic transmission. As a result, VPA indirectly modulates neurotransmitter release and strengthens the threshold for seizure activity. However, even though participating to the anticonvulsant action, such mechanisms seem to have minor impact on epileptogenesis. Nonetheless, VPA has been reported to exert anti-epileptogenic effects. Epigenetic mechanisms, including histone deacetylases (HDACs), BDNF and GDNF modulation are pivotal to orientate neurons toward a neuroprotective status and promote dendritic spines organization. From such broad spectrum of actions comes constantly enlarging indications for VPA. It represents a drug of choice in child and adult with epilepsy, with either general or focal seizures, and is a consistent and safe IV option in generalized convulsive status epilepticus. Moreover, since VPA modulates DNA transcription through HDACs, recent evidences point to its use as an anti-nociceptive in migraine prophylaxis, and, even more interestingly, as a positive modulator of chemotherapy in cancer treatment. Furthermore, VPA-induced neuroprotection is under investigation for benefit in stroke and traumatic brain injury. Hence, VPA has still got its place in epilepsy, and yet deserves attention for its use far beyond neurological diseases. In this review, we aim to highlight, with a translational intent, the molecular basis and the clinical indications of VPA.

Ever since the pioneering reports in the 60s, L-3,4-Dioxyphenylalanine (levodopa) has represented the gold standard for the treatment of Parkinson's Disease (PD). However, long-term levodopa (LD) treatment is frequently associated with fluctuations in motor response with serious impact on patient quality of life. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of LD are pivotal to such motor fluctuations: discontinuous drug delivery, short half-life, poor bioavailability, and narrow therapeutic window are all crucial for such fluctuations. During the last 60 years, several attempts have been made to improve LD treatment and avoid long-term complications. Research and trials to improve the LD pharmacokinetic since 1960s are reviewed, summarizing the progressive improvements of LD treatment. Inhibitors of peripheral amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) have been introduced to achieve proper LD concentration in the central nervous system reducing systemic adverse events. Inhibitors of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) increased LD half-life and bioavailability. Efforts are still being made to achieve a continuous dopaminergic stimulation, with the combination of oral LD with an AADC inhibitor and a COMT inhibitor, or the intra-duodenal water-based LD/ carbidopa gel. Further approaches to enhance LD efficacy are focused on new non-oral administration routes, including nasal, intra-duodenal, intrapulmonary (CVT-301) and subcutaneous (ND0612), as well as on novel ER formulations, including IPX066, which recently concluded phase III trial. New LD formulations, oral compounds as well as routes have been tested in the last years, with two main targets: achieve continuous dopaminergic stimulation and find an instant deliver route for LD.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection predisposes patients to arterial and venous thrombosis. This study aimed to systematically review the available evidence in the literature for cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) in association with coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases to identify cases of COVID‐19‐associated CVT. The search period spanned January 1^st to December 1^st 2020 and the review protocol (PROSPERO‐CRD42020214327) followed PRISMA guidelines. Identified studies were evaluated for bias using the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale (NOS). Proportion meta‐analysis was performed to estimate the frequency of CVT among hospitalized COVID‐19 patients. Results We identified 57 cases from 28 reports. Study quality was mostly classified as low. CVT symptoms developed after respiratory disease in 90%, the mean interval was 13 days. CVT involved multiple sites in 67% of individuals, the deep venous system was affected in 37% and parenchymal hemorrhage was found in 42%. Predisposing factors for CVT beyond SARS‐CoV‐2 infection were present in 31%. In‐hospital mortality was 40%. Using data from 34331 patients, the estimated frequency of CVT among hospitalized for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection was 0.08% (95%CI=0.01‐0.5). In an in‐patient setting, CVT accounted for 4.2% of cerebrovascular disorders in individuals with COVID‐19 (cohort of 406 patients, 95%CI=1.47‐11.39). Conclusion CVT in the context of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is a rare, although there seems to be an increased relative risk. High suspicion is necessary, since the diagnosis of this potentially life‐threatening condition in COVID‐19 patients can be challenging. Evidence is still scarce on the pathophysiology and potential prevention of COVID‐19 associated CVT.