7 research outputs found

    \u3cem\u3eRhizobium japonicum\u3c/em\u3e Mutants Defective in Symbiotic Nitrogen Fixation

    Get PDF
    Rhizobium japonicum strains 3I1b110 and 61A76 were mutagenized to obtain 25 independently derived mutants that produced soybean nodules defective in nitrogen fixation, as assayed by acetylene reduction. The proteins of both the bacterial and the plant portions of the nodules were analyzed by two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. All of the mutants had lower-than-normal levels of the nitrogenase components, and all but four contained a prominent bacteroid protein not observed in wild-type bacteroids. Experiments with bacteria grown ex planta suggested that this protein was derepressed by the absence of ammonia. Nitrogenase component II of one mutant was altered in isoelectric point. The soluble plant fraction of the nodules of seven mutants had very low levels of heme, yet the nodules of five of these seven mutants contained the polypeptide of leghemoglobin. Thus, the synthesis of the globin may not be coupled to the content of available heme in soybean nodules. The nodules of the other two of these seven mutants lacked not only leghemoglobin but most of the other normal plant and bacteroid proteins. Ultrastructural examination of nodules formed by these two mutants indicated normal ramification of infection threads but suggested a problem in subsequent survival of the bacteria and their release from the infection threads

    Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine response in adults with predominantly antibody deficiency

    No full text
    Background: Patients with predominantly antibody deficiency (PAD) have lower anti–severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike antibody levels after initial 2-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination than healthy controls do; however, the anti-spike antibody responses and neutralization function in patients with PAD following subsequent immunizations remain understudied. Objective: We sought to characterize anti-spike antibody responses in adults with PAD over the course of 5 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses and identify diagnostic and immunophenotypic risk factors for low antibody response. Methods: We evaluated anti-spike antibody levels in 117 adult patients with PAD and 192 adult healthy controls following a maximum of 5 SARS-CoV-2 immunizations. We assessed neutralization of the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type strain and the Omicron BA.5 variant and analyzed infection outcomes. Results: The patients with PAD had significantly lower mean anti-spike antibody levels after 3 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses than the healthy controls did (1,439.1 vs 21,890.4 U/mL [P < .0001]). Adults with secondary PAD, severe primary PAD, and high-risk immunophenotypes had lower mean anti-spike antibody levels following vaccine doses 2, 3, and/or 4 but not following vaccine dose 5. Compared with patients with mild and moderate PAD, patients with severe PAD had a higher rate of increase in anti-spike antibody levels over 5 immunizations. A strong positive correlation was observed between anti-spike antibody levels and neutralization of both the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type strain and the Omicron BA.5 variant. Most infections were managed on an outpatient basis. Conclusions: In all of the patients with PAD, anti-spike antibody levels increased with successive SARS-CoV-2 immunizations and were correlated with neutralization of both the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type strain and the Omicron BA.5 variant. Secondary PAD, severe primary PAD, and high-risk immunophenotypes were correlated with lower mean anti-spike antibody levels following vaccine doses 2 through 4. Patients with severe PAD had the highest rate of increase in anti-spike antibody levels over 5 immunizations. These data suggest a clinical benefit to sequential SARS-CoV-2 immunizations, particularly among high-risk patients with PAD

    Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

    Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P=0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P=0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction

    Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

    Health status after invasive or conservative care in coronary and advanced kidney disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of &lt;30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status. METHODS We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy. RESULTS Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, 120.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, 122.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, 121.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, 122.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSIONS Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy
    corecore