Genetic Determinants of Coxsackievirus B3 Pathogenesis

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)Enteric viruses are among the most common infectious human viruses worldwide, causing an estimated 10-15 million infections per year in the United States. Among enteric viruses, Coxsackievirus is commonly isolated and can lead to the development of meningitis, encephalitis, pancreatitis, and hepatitis. Furthermore, Coxsackievirus B3 is the primary cause of viral myocarditis and can lead to pleurodynia, with nearly 40,000 symptomatic cases reported in the United States each year. The enteroviral ssRNA genome contains a 5’ untranslated region (5’UTR) which consists of two structural components, the cloverleaf and the internal ribosome entry site (IRES), both shown to be integral to viral success. Additionally, the viral genome encodes four structural VP proteins as well as 11 non-structural proteins. Polymorphisms found within the CVB3 population have been linked to viral virulence. Here, we compare two CVB3 Nancy variants to elucidate the downstream effects observed in response to mutations found in the CVB3 genome. Implementing our novel oral inoculation model, we aimed to determine the impact mutations found in the 5’UTR and VP regions exert on viral pathogenesis. We also aimed to delineate the in vitro effects of the observed mutations. We investigated the role mutations found in the structural regions played in virus host cell attachment, in vitro cell viability, and replication. Our work has further confirmed the relevance and impact of mutations found in the VP region of the CVB3 genome

Regulation of myocardial oxygen delivery in response to graded reductions in hematocrit: Role of K+ channels

This study was designed to identify mechanisms responsible for coronary vasodilation in response to progressive decreases in hematocrit. Isovolemic hemodilution was produced in open-chest, anesthetized swine via concurrent removal of 500 ml of arterial blood and the addition of 500 ml of 37 °C saline or synthetic plasma expander (Hespan, 6% hetastarch in 0.9% sodium chloride). Progressive hemodilution with Hespan resulted in an increase in coronary flow from 0.39 ± 0.05 to 1.63 ± 0.16 ml/min/g (P < 0.001) as hematocrit was reduced from 32 ± 1 to 10 ± 1% (P < 0.001). Overall, coronary flow corresponded with the level of myocardial oxygen consumption, was dependent on arterial pressures ≥ ~ 60 mmHg, and occurred with little/no change in coronary venous PO2. Anemic coronary vasodilation was unaffected by the inhibition of nitric oxide synthase (l-NAME: 25 mg/kg iv; P = 0.92) or voltage-dependent K+ (K V) channels (4-aminopyridine: 0.3 mg/kg iv; P = 0.52). However, administration of the K ATP channel antagonist (glibenclamide: 3.6 mg/kg iv) resulted in an ~ 40% decrease in coronary blood flow (P < 0.001) as hematocrit was reduced to ~ 10%. These reductions in coronary blood flow corresponded with significant reductions in myocardial oxygen delivery at baseline and throughout isovolemic anemia (P < 0.001). These data indicate that vasodilator factors produced in response to isovolemic hemodilution converge on vascular smooth muscle glibenclamide-sensitive (K ATP) channels to maintain myocardial oxygen delivery and that this response is not dependent on endothelial-derived nitric oxide production or pathways that mediate dilation via K V channels

A Course-Based Research Experience: How Benefits Change with Increased Investment in Instructional Time

While course-based research in genomics can generate both knowledge gains and a greater appreciation for how science is done, a significant investment of course time is required to enable students to show gains commensurate to a summer research experience. Nonetheless, this is a very cost-effective way to reach larger numbers of students

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of antidepressants in Parkinson disease

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) in the treatment of depression in Parkinson disease (PD). METHODS: A total of 115 subjects with PD were enrolled at 20 sites. Subjects were randomized to receive an SSRI (paroxetine; n = 42), an SNRI (venlafaxine extended release [XR]; n = 34), or placebo (n = 39). Subjects met DSM-IV criteria for a depressive disorder, or operationally defined subsyndromal depression, and scored >12 on the first 17 items of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D). Subjects were followed for 12 weeks (6-week dosage adjustment, 6-week maintenance). Maximum daily dosages were 40 mg for paroxetine and 225 mg for venlafaxine XR. The primary outcome measure was change in the HAM-D score from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: Treatment effects (relative to placebo), expressed as mean 12-week reductions in HAM-D score, were 6.2 points (97.5% confidence interval [CI] 2.2 to 10.3, p = 0.0007) in the paroxetine group and 4.2 points (97.5% CI 0.1 to 8.4, p = 0.02) in the venlafaxine XR group. No treatment effects were seen on motor function. CONCLUSIONS: Both paroxetine and venlafaxine XR significantly improved depression in subjects with PD. Both medications were generally safe and well tolerated and did not worsen motor function. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that paroxetine and venlafaxine XR are effective in treating depression in patients with PD

A central support system can facilitate implementation and sustainability of a Classroom-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) in Genomics.

In their 2012 report, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology advocated "replacing standard science laboratory courses with discovery-based research courses"-a challenging proposition that presents practical and pedagogical difficulties. In this paper, we describe our collective experiences working with the Genomics Education Partnership, a nationwide faculty consortium that aims to provide undergraduates with a research experience in genomics through a scheduled course (a classroom-based undergraduate research experience, or CURE). We examine the common barriers encountered in implementing a CURE, program elements of most value to faculty, ways in which a shared core support system can help, and the incentives for and rewards of establishing a CURE on our diverse campuses. While some of the barriers and rewards are specific to a research project utilizing a genomics approach, other lessons learned should be broadly applicable. We find that a central system that supports a shared investigation can mitigate some shortfalls in campus infrastructure (such as time for new curriculum development, availability of IT services) and provides collegial support for change. Our findings should be useful for designing similar supportive programs to facilitate change in the way we teach science for undergraduates

A Central Support System Can Facilitate Implementation and Sustainability of a Classroom-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) in Genomics

In their 2012 report, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology advocated “replacing standard science laboratory courses with discovery-based research courses”—a challenging proposition that presents practical and pedagogical difficulties. In this paper, we describe our collective experiences working with the Genomics Education Partnership, a nationwide faculty consortium that aims to provide undergraduates with a research experience in genomics through a scheduled course (a classroom-based undergraduate research experience, or CURE). We examine the common barriers encountered in implementing a CURE, program elements of most value to faculty, ways in which a shared core support system can help, and the incentives for and rewards of establishing a CURE on our diverse campuses. While some of the barriers and rewards are specific to a research project utilizing a genomics approach, other lessons learned should be broadly applicable. We find that a central system that supports a shared investigation can mitigate some shortfalls in campus infrastructure (such as time for new curriculum development, availability of IT services) and provides collegial support for change. Our findings should be useful for designing similar supportive programs to facilitate change in the way we teach science for undergraduates