Aptamer-based multiplexed proteomic technology for biomarker discovery

Interrogation of the human proteome in a highly multiplexed and efficient manner remains a coveted and challenging goal in biology. We present a new aptamer-based proteomic technology for biomarker discovery capable of simultaneously measuring thousands of proteins from small sample volumes (15 [mu]L of serum or plasma). Our current assay allows us to measure ~800 proteins with very low limits of detection (1 pM average), 7 logs of overall dynamic range, and 5% average coefficient of variation. This technology is enabled by a new generation of aptamers that contain chemically modified nucleotides, which greatly expand the physicochemical diversity of the large randomized nucleic acid libraries from which the aptamers are selected. Proteins in complex matrices such as plasma are measured with a process that transforms a signature of protein concentrations into a corresponding DNA aptamer concentration signature, which is then quantified with a DNA microarray. In essence, our assay takes advantage of the dual nature of aptamers as both folded binding entities with defined shapes and unique sequences recognizable by specific hybridization probes. To demonstrate the utility of our proteomics biomarker discovery technology, we applied it to a clinical study of chronic kidney disease (CKD). We identified two well known CKD biomarkers as well as an additional 58 potential CKD biomarkers. These results demonstrate the potential utility of our technology to discover unique protein signatures characteristic of various disease states. More generally, we describe a versatile and powerful tool that allows large-scale comparison of proteome profiles among discrete populations. This unbiased and highly multiplexed search engine will enable the discovery of novel biomarkers in a manner that is unencumbered by our incomplete knowledge of biology, thereby helping to advance the next generation of evidence-based medicine

Identification of Surprisingly Diverse Type IV Pili, across a Broad Range of Gram-Positive Bacteria

In Gram-negative bacteria, type IV pili (TFP) have long been known to play important roles in such diverse biological phenomena as surface adhesion, motility, and DNA transfer, with significant consequences for pathogenicity. More recently it became apparent that Gram-positive bacteria also express type IV pili; however, little is known about the diversity and abundance of these structures in Gram-positives. Computational tools for automated identification of type IV pilins are not currently available.To assess TFP diversity in Gram-positive bacteria and facilitate pilin identification, we compiled a comprehensive list of putative Gram-positive pilins encoded by operons containing highly conserved pilus biosynthetic genes (pilB, pilC). A surprisingly large number of species were found to contain multiple TFP operons (pil, com and/or tad). The N-terminal sequences of predicted pilins were exploited to develop PilFind, a rule-based algorithm for genome-wide identification of otherwise poorly conserved type IV pilins in any species, regardless of their association with TFP biosynthetic operons (http://signalfind.org). Using PilFind to scan 53 Gram-positive genomes (encoding >187,000 proteins), we identified 286 candidate pilins, including 214 in operons containing TFP biosynthetic genes (TBG+ operons). Although trained on Gram-positive pilins, PilFind identified 55 of 58 manually curated Gram-negative pilins in TBG+ operons, as well as 53 additional pilin candidates in operons lacking biosynthetic genes in ten species (>38,000 proteins), including 27 of 29 experimentally verified pilins. False positive rates appear to be low, as PilFind predicted only four pilin candidates in eleven bacterial species (>13,000 proteins) lacking TFP biosynthetic genes.We have shown that Gram-positive bacteria contain a highly diverse set of type IV pili. PilFind can be an invaluable tool to study bacterial cellular processes known to involve type IV pilus-like structures. Its use in combination with other currently available computational tools should improve the accuracy of predicting the subcellular localization of bacterial proteins

Evidence in the learning organization

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Organizational leaders in business and medicine have been experiencing a similar dilemma: how to ensure that their organizational members are adopting work innovations in a timely fashion. Organizational leaders in healthcare have attempted to resolve this dilemma by offering specific solutions, such as evidence-based medicine (EBM), but organizations are still not systematically adopting evidence-based practice innovations as rapidly as expected by policy-makers (the knowing-doing gap problem). Some business leaders have adopted a systems-based perspective, called the learning organization (LO), to address a similar dilemma. Three years ago, the Society of General Internal Medicine's Evidence-based Medicine Task Force began an inquiry to integrate the EBM and LO concepts into one model to address the knowing-doing gap problem.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>During the model development process, the authors searched several databases for relevant LO frameworks and their related concepts by using a broad search strategy. To identify the key LO frameworks and consolidate them into one model, the authors used consensus-based decision-making and a narrative thematic synthesis guided by several qualitative criteria. The authors subjected the model to external, independent review and improved upon its design with this feedback.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The authors found seven LO frameworks particularly relevant to evidence-based practice innovations in organizations. The authors describe their interpretations of these frameworks for healthcare organizations, the process they used to integrate the LO frameworks with EBM principles, and the resulting Evidence in the Learning Organization (ELO) model. They also provide a health organization scenario to illustrate ELO concepts in application.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The authors intend, by sharing the LO frameworks and the ELO model, to help organizations identify their capacities to learn and share knowledge about evidence-based practice innovations. The ELO model will need further validation and improvement through its use in organizational settings and applied health services research.</p

Disorders of sex development : insights from targeted gene sequencing of a large international patient cohort

Background: Disorders of sex development (DSD) are congenital conditions in which chromosomal, gonadal, or phenotypic sex is atypical. Clinical management of DSD is often difficult and currently only 13% of patients receive an accurate clinical genetic diagnosis. To address this we have developed a massively parallel sequencing targeted DSD gene panel which allows us to sequence all 64 known diagnostic DSD genes and candidate genes simultaneously. Results: We analyzed DNA from the largest reported international cohort of patients with DSD (278 patients with 46, XY DSD and 48 with 46, XX DSD). Our targeted gene panel compares favorably with other sequencing platforms. We found a total of 28 diagnostic genes that are implicated in DSD, highlighting the genetic spectrum of this disorder. Sequencing revealed 93 previously unreported DSD gene variants. Overall, we identified a likely genetic diagnosis in 43% of patients with 46, XY DSD. In patients with 46, XY disorders of androgen synthesis and action the genetic diagnosis rate reached 60%. Surprisingly, little difference in diagnostic rate was observed between singletons and trios. In many cases our findings are informative as to the likely cause of the DSD, which will facilitate clinical management. Conclusions: Our massively parallel sequencing targeted DSD gene panel represents an economical means of improving the genetic diagnostic capability for patients affected by DSD. Implementation of this panel in a large cohort of patients has expanded our understanding of the underlying genetic etiology of DSD. The inclusion of research candidate genes also provides an invaluable resource for future identification of novel genes

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care1 or hospitalization2–4 after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes—including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)—in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease

Mortality Among Adults With Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy or Immunotherapy and Infected With COVID-19

Importance: Large cohorts of patients with active cancers and COVID-19 infection are needed to provide evidence of the association of recent cancer treatment and cancer type with COVID-19 mortality. // Objective: To evaluate whether systemic anticancer treatments (SACTs), tumor subtypes, patient demographic characteristics (age and sex), and comorbidities are associated with COVID-19 mortality. // Design, Setting, and Participants: The UK Coronavirus Cancer Monitoring Project (UKCCMP) is a prospective cohort study conducted at 69 UK cancer hospitals among adult patients (≥18 years) with an active cancer and a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. Patients registered from March 18 to August 1, 2020, were included in this analysis. // Exposures: SACT, tumor subtype, patient demographic characteristics (eg, age, sex, body mass index, race and ethnicity, smoking history), and comorbidities were investigated. // Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was all-cause mortality within the primary hospitalization. // Results: Overall, 2515 of 2786 patients registered during the study period were included; 1464 (58%) were men; and the median (IQR) age was 72 (62-80) years. The mortality rate was 38% (966 patients). The data suggest an association between higher mortality in patients with hematological malignant neoplasms irrespective of recent SACT, particularly in those with acute leukemias or myelodysplastic syndrome (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.30-3.60) and myeloma or plasmacytoma (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.04-2.26). Lung cancer was also significantly associated with higher COVID-19–related mortality (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.11-2.25). No association between higher mortality and receiving chemotherapy in the 4 weeks before COVID-19 diagnosis was observed after correcting for the crucial confounders of age, sex, and comorbidities. An association between lower mortality and receiving immunotherapy in the 4 weeks before COVID-19 diagnosis was observed (immunotherapy vs no cancer therapy: OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31-0.86). // Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study of patients with active cancer suggest that recent SACT is not associated with inferior outcomes from COVID-19 infection. This has relevance for the care of patients with cancer requiring treatment, particularly in countries experiencing an increase in COVID-19 case numbers. Important differences in outcomes among patients with hematological and lung cancers were observed

Polygenic risk score in postmortem diagnosed sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease

Sporadic early onset Alzheimer’s disease (sEOAD) exhibits the symptoms of late onset Alzheimer’s disease (LOAD) but lacks the familial aspect of the early onset familial form. The genetics of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) identifies APOEε4 to be the greatest risk factor; however, it is a complex disease involving both environmental risk factors and multiple genetic loci. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) accumulate the total risk of a phenotype in an individual based on variants present in their genome. We determined whether sEOAD cases had a higher PRS compared to controls. A cohort of sEOAD cases were genotyped on the NeuroX array and PRS were generated using PRSice. The target dataset consisted of 408 sEOAD cases and 436 controls. The base dataset was collated by the IGAP consortium, with association data from 17,008 LOAD cases and 37,154 controls, which can be used for identifying sEOAD cases due to having shared phenotype. PRS were generated using all common SNPs between the base and target dataset, PRS were also generated using only SNPs within a 500kb region surrounding the APOE gene. Sex and number of APOE ε2 or ε4 alleles were used as variables for logistic regression and combined with PRS. The results show that PRS is higher on average in sEOAD cases than controls, although there is still overlap amongst the whole cohort. Predictive ability of identifying cases and controls using PRSice was calculated with 72.9% accuracy, greater than the APOE locus alone (65.2%). Predictive ability was further improved with logistic regression, identifying cases and controls with 75.5% accuracy