Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

[EX Q]: Context: Food atopy patch tests (APTs) are considered a useful tool for the diagnosis of food allergy. Hypersensitivity to peanuts has not been investigated by means of APTs so far.', 'APTs and skin prick tests (SPTs) with peanuts were performed in 136 atopic dermatitis (AD) patients. Relevance of positive and negative responses to these tests was assessed by repeated open challenges with peanuts.', 'Nine percent of our AD patients reacted to the challenge. Positive responses to APTs were recorded in 19% of the patients, whereas in 12% positive SPTs were observed. APTs were more frequently positive in subjects with eczematous responses after challenge with respect to those with urticarial reactions. SPT reactivity proved to be higher in patients above 12 years of age, whereas APT positivity was more frequent in children under 6 years. APT sensitivity proved significantly higher than SPT sensitivity, in particular in children under 12 years of age. On the contrary, SPT specificity and positive predictive value were significantly higher with respect to those of APT in the age group of subjects under 6 years of age.
Answer: Our data suggest that APTs with peanuts may represent a useful integration to standard testing modalities employed for the diagnosis of peanut allergy in AD patients.
[EX A]: Does combined skin prick and patch testing enhance identification of peanut-allergic patients with atopic dermatitis?

[EX Q]: Context: In streptozotocin-injected rats (STZ-rats), we previously demonstrated a role for angiotensin II (AT-II) in cardiac remodelling and insulin resistance partially counteracted by in vivo treatment with losartan, an AT-II receptor antagonist.We now aimed to investigate the effect of treating diabetic STZ-rats with losartan on diabetes vascular response to vasoconstrictors.', 'Male Wistar rats were randomly divided in four groups, two of them were assigned to receive losartan in the drinking water (20 mg/kg/day) until the experiment ending (3 weeks afterward). After 1 week, two groups, one of which receiving losartan, were injected in the tail vein with citrate buffer (normoglycemic, N and normoglycemic, losartan-treated, NL). The remaining received a single injection of streptozotocin (50 mg/kg in citrate i.v.) thus becoming diabetic (D) and diabetic losartan-treated (DL). Plasma glycaemia and blood pressure were measured in all animals before the sacrifice (15 days after diabetes induction).In aortic strips isolated from N, NL, D and DL rats we evaluated i) the isometric concentration-dependent contractile response to phenylephrine (Phe) and to AT-II; ii) the RhoA-kinase (ROCK1) activity and expression by enzyme-immunoassay and Western blot respectively.', 'The concentration-dependent contractile effect of Phe was similar in aortas from all groups, whereas at all concentrations tested, AT-II contraction efficacy was 2 and half and 1 and half times higher in D and DL respectively in comparison with N and NL. AT-II contracture was similarly reduced in all groups by AT-II receptor antagonists, irbesartan or irbesartan plus PD123319. HA-1077 (10 microM), an inhibitor of ROCK1 activity, reduced AT-II efficacy (Deltamg/mg tissue w.w.) by -3.5 +/- 1.0, -4.6 +/- 1.9, -22.1 +/- 2.2 and -11.4 +/- 1.3 in N, NL, D and DL respectively). ROCK1 activity and expression were higher in D than in N/NL and DL aortas.
Answer: Aortas isolated from STZ-rats present hyper-contracture to AT-II mainly dependent on the up-regulation of ROCK1 expression/activity. In vivo losartan treatment partially corrects AT-II hyper-contracture, limiting the increase in ROCK1 expression/activity. These data offer a new molecular mechanism supporting the rationale for using losartan in the prevention of diabetic vascular complications.
[EX A]: Does losartan counteract the hyper-reactivity to angiotensin II and ROCK1 over-activation in aortas isolated from streptozotocin-injected diabetic rats?

[EX Q]: Context: Heterotopic ossification (HO) may occur after musculoskeletal trauma, traumatic brain injury, and total joint arthroplasty. As such, HO is a compelling clinical concern in both military and civilian medicine. A possible etiology of HO involves dysregulated signals in the bone morphogenetic protein osteogenic cascade. Contemporary treatment options for HO (ie, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and radiation therapy) have adverse effects associated with their use and are not biologically engineered to abrogate the molecular mechanisms that govern osteogenic differentiation.', 'We hypothesized that (1) nanogel-mediated short interfering RNA (siRNA) delivery against Runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2) and osterix (Osx) genes will decrease messenger RNA expression; (2) inhibit activity of the osteogenic marker alkaline phosphatase (ALP); and (3) inhibit hydroxyapatite (HA) deposition in osteoblast cell cultures.', 'Nanogel nanostructured polymers delivered siRNA in 48-hour treatment cycles against master osteogenic regulators, Runx2 and Osx, in murine calvarial preosteoblasts (MC3T3-E1.4) stimulated for osteogenic differentiation by recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2). The efficacy of RNA interference (RNAi) therapeutics was determined by quantitation of messenger RNA knockdown (by quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction), downstream protein knockdown (determined ALP enzymatic activity assay), and HA deposition (determined by OsteoImage™️ assay).', 'Gene expression assays demonstrated that nanogel-based RNAi treatments at 1:1 and 5:1 nanogel:short interfering RNA weight ratios reduced Runx2 expression by 48.59%19.53% (p<0.001) and 43.22%18.01% (both p<0.001). The same 1:1 and 5:1 treatments against both Runx2 and Osx reduced expression of Osx by 51.65%10.85% and 47.65%9.80% (both p<0.001). Moreover, repeated 48-hour RNAi treatment cycles against Runx2 and Osx rhBMP-2 administration reduced ALP activity after 4 and 7days. ALP reductions after 4days in culture by nanogel 5:1 and 10:1 RNAi treatments were 32.4%12.0% and 33.6%13.8% (both p<0.001). After 7days in culture, nanogel 1:1 and 5:1 RNAi treatments produced 35.9%14.0% and 47.7%3.2% reductions in ALP activity. Osteoblast mineralization data after 21days suggested that nanogel 1:1, 5:1, and 10:1 RNAi treatments decreased mineralization (ie, HA deposition) from cultures treated only with rhBMP-2 (p<0.001). However, despite RNAi attack on Runx2 and Osx, HA deposition levels remained greater than non-rhBMP-2-treated cell cultures.
Answer: Although mRNA and protein knockdown were confirmed as a result of RNAi treatments against Runx2 and Osx, complete elimination of mineralization processes was not achieved. RNAi targeting mid- and late-stage osteoblast differentiation markers such as ALP, osteocalcin, osteopontin, and bone sialoprotein) may produce the desired RNAi-nanogel nanostructured polymer HO prophylaxis.
[EX A]:
Does cationic Nanogel-mediated Runx2 and Osterix siRNA Delivery decrease Mineralization in MC3T3 Cells?