Molecular insights into an ancient form of Paget’s disease of bone

Paget’s disease of bone (PDB) is a chronic skeletal disorder that can affect one or several bones in individuals over 55 years of age. PDB like changes have been reported in archaeological remains as old as Roman, although accurate diagnosis and natural history of the disease is lacking. Six skeletons from a collection of 130 excavated at Norton Priory in the North West of England, which dates to medieval times, show atypical and extensive pathological changes resembling contemporary PDB affecting up to 75% of individual skeletons. Disease prevalence in the remaining collection is high, at least 16% of adults, with age at death estimations as low as 35 years. Despite these atypical features, paleoproteomic analysis identified sequestosome 1 (SQSTM1) or p62, a protein central to the pathological milieu of PDB, as one of the few non69 collagenous human sequences preserved in skeletal samples. Targeted proteomic analysis detected >60% of the ancient p62 primary sequence with western blotting indicating p62 abnormalities including in dentition. Direct sequencing of ancient DNA excluded contemporary PDB associated SQSTM1 mutations. Our observations indicate that the ancient p62 protein is likely modified within its C-terminal ubiquitin associated (UBA) domain. Ancient microRNAs were remarkably preserved in an osteosarcoma from a skeleton with extensive disease, with miR-16 expression consistent with that reported in contemporary PDB associated bone tumours. Our work displays the use of proteomics to inform diagnosis of ancient disease such as atypical PDB, which has unusual features presumably potentiated by as yet unidentified environmental or genetic factors

More rigorous protocol adherence to intensive structured management improves blood pressure control in primary care: results from the Valsartan Intensified Primary carE Reduction of Blood Pressure study

Objective: To examine protocol adherence to structured intensive management in the Valsartan Intensified Primary carE Reduction of Blood Pressure (VIPER-BP) study involving 119 primary care clinics and 1562 randomized participants.\ud \ud Methods: Prospective criteria for assessing adherence to treatment prescription, uptitration, and visit attendance at 6, 10, 14, and 18 weeks postrandomization were applied to 1038 intervention participants. Protocol adherence scores of 1–5 (least to most adherent) were compared to blood pressure (BP) control during 26 weeks of follow-up.\ud \ud Results: Mean age was 59.3 ±12.0 years, 963 (62%) were men, and 1045 (67%) had longstanding hypertension. Clinic attendance dropped from 91 (week 6) to 83% (week 26) and pharmacological instructions were followed for 93% (baseline) to 61% at week 14 (uptitration failures commonly representing protocol deviations). Overall, 26-week BP levels and BP target attainment ranged from 132 ± 14/79 ± 9 and 51% to 141 ± 15/83 ± 11 mmHg and 19% in those participants subject to the highest (n = 270, 26%) versus least (n = 148, 14%) per protocol adherence, respectively; adjusted relative risk (RR) 1.22 per unit protocol adherence score, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15–1.31; for achieving BP target (P < 0.001). Participants with a per protocol score of 4 or 5 (512/1038, 49.3%) were 1.54-fold (95% CI 1.31–1.81; P < 0.001) more likely to achieve their individual BP target compared with usual care. Clinics equipped with a practice nurse significantly influenced protocol adherence (adjusted RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06–1.37; P = 0.004) and individual BP control (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04–1.41; P = 0.015).\ud \ud Conclusion: There is considerable potential for structured care management to improve BP control in primary care, especially when optimally applied.\u

Impact of nurse-mediated management on achieving blood pressure goal levels in primary care: insights from the Valsartan intensified primary carE reduction of blood pressure study

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure targets in individuals treated for hypertension in primary care remain difficult to attain. AIMS: To assess the role of practice nurses in facilitating intensive and structured management to achieve ideal BP levels. METHODS: We analysed outcome data from the Valsartan Intensified Primary carE Reduction of Blood Pressure Study. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) to the study intervention or usual care. Within both groups, a practice nurse mediated the management of blood pressure for 439 patients with endpoint blood pressure data (n=1492). Patient management was categorised as: standard usual care (n=348, 23.3%); practice nurse-mediated usual care (n=156, 10.5%); standard intervention (n=705, 47.3%) and practice nurse-mediated intervention (n=283, 19.0%). Blood pressure goal attainment at 26-week follow-up was then compared. RESULTS: Mean age was 59.3&plusmn;12.0 years and 62% were men. Baseline blood pressure was similar in practice nurse-mediated (usual care or intervention) and standard care management patients (150 &plusmn; 16/88 &plusmn; 11 vs. 150 &plusmn; 17/89 &plusmn; 11 mmHg, respectively). Practice nurse-mediated patients had a stricter blood pressure goal of ⩽125/75 mmHg (33.7% vs. 27.3%, p=0.026). Practice nurse-mediated intervention patients achieved the greatest blood pressure falls and the highest level of blood pressure goal attainment (39.2%) compared with standard intervention (35.0%), practice nurse-mediated usual care (32.1%) and standard usual care (25.3%; p&lt;0.001). Practice nurse-mediated intervention patients were almost two-fold more likely to achieve their blood pressure goal compared with standard usual care patients (adjusted odds ratio 1.92, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 2.78; p=0.001). CONCLUSION: There is greater potential to achieve blood pressure targets in primary care with practice nurse-mediated hypertension management

The colonial legacy of herbaria

Herbarium collections shape our understanding of Earth’s flora and are crucial for addressing global change issues. Their formation, however, is not free from sociopolitical issues of immediate relevance. Despite increasing efforts addressing issues of representation and colonialism in natural history collections, herbaria have received comparatively less attention. While it has been noted that the majority of plant specimens are housed in the Global North, the extent and magnitude of this disparity have not been quantified. Here we examine the colonial legacy of botanical collections, analysing 85,621,930 specimen records and assessing survey responses from 92 herbarium collections across 39 countries. We find an inverse relationship between where plant diversity exists in nature and where it is housed in herbaria. Such disparities persist across physical and digital realms despite overt colonialism ending over half a century ago. We emphasize the need for acknowledging the colonial history of herbarium collections and implementing a more equitable global paradigm for their collection, curation and use

The colonial legacy of herbaria

Herbarium collections shape our understanding of the world’s flora and are crucial for addressing global change and biodiversity conservation. The formation of such natural history collections, however, are not free from sociopolitical issues of immediate relevance. Despite increasing efforts addressing issues of representation and colonialism in natural history collections, herbaria have received comparatively less attention. While it has been noted that the majority of plant specimens are housed in the global North, the extent of this disparity has not been rigorously quantified to date. Here, by analyzing over 85 million specimen records and surveying herbaria across the globe, we assess the colonial legacy of botanical collections and how we may move towards a more inclusive future. We demonstrate that colonial exploitation has contributed to an inverse relationship between where plant biodiversity exists in nature and where it is housed in herbaria. Such disparities persist in herbaria across physical and digital realms despite overt colonialism having ended over half a century ago, suggesting ongoing digitization and decolonization efforts have yet to alleviate colonial-era discrepancies. We emphasize the need for acknowledging the inconvenient history of herbarium collections and the implementation of a more equitable, global paradigm for their collection, curation, and use

A global metagenomic map of urban microbiomes and antimicrobial resistance

We present a global atlas of 4,728 metagenomic samples from mass-transit systems in 60 cities over 3 years, representing the first systematic, worldwide catalog of the urban microbial ecosystem. This atlas provides an annotated, geospatial profile of microbial strains, functional characteristics, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) markers, and genetic elements, including 10,928 viruses, 1,302 bacteria, 2 archaea, and 838,532 CRISPR arrays not found in reference databases. We identified 4,246 known species of urban microorganisms and a consistent set of 31 species found in 97% of samples that were distinct from human commensal organisms. Profiles of AMR genes varied widely in type and density across cities. Cities showed distinct microbial taxonomic signatures that were driven by climate and geographic differences. These results constitute a high-resolution global metagenomic atlas that enables discovery of organisms and genes, highlights potential public health and forensic applications, and provides a culture-independent view of AMR burden in cities.Funding: the Tri-I Program in Computational Biology and Medicine (CBM) funded by NIH grant 1T32GM083937; GitHub; Philip Blood and the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE), supported by NSF grant number ACI-1548562 and NSF award number ACI-1445606; NASA (NNX14AH50G, NNX17AB26G), the NIH (R01AI151059, R25EB020393, R21AI129851, R35GM138152, U01DA053941); STARR Foundation (I13- 0052); LLS (MCL7001-18, LLS 9238-16, LLS-MCL7001-18); the NSF (1840275); the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1151054); the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (G-2015-13964); Swiss National Science Foundation grant number 407540_167331; NIH award number UL1TR000457; the US Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute under contract number DE-AC02-05CH11231; the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, supported by the Office of Science of the US Department of Energy; Stockholm Health Authority grant SLL 20160933; the Institut Pasteur Korea; an NRF Korea grant (NRF-2014K1A4A7A01074645, 2017M3A9G6068246); the CONICYT Fondecyt Iniciación grants 11140666 and 11160905; Keio University Funds for Individual Research; funds from the Yamagata prefectural government and the city of Tsuruoka; JSPS KAKENHI grant number 20K10436; the bilateral AT-UA collaboration fund (WTZ:UA 02/2019; Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, UA:M/84-2019, M/126-2020); Kyiv Academic Univeristy; Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine project numbers 0118U100290 and 0120U101734; Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa 2013–2017; the CERCA Programme / Generalitat de Catalunya; the CRG-Novartis-Africa mobility program 2016; research funds from National Cheng Kung University and the Ministry of Science and Technology; Taiwan (MOST grant number 106-2321-B-006-016); we thank all the volunteers who made sampling NYC possible, Minciencias (project no. 639677758300), CNPq (EDN - 309973/2015-5), the Open Research Fund of Key Laboratory of Advanced Theory and Application in Statistics and Data Science – MOE, ECNU, the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong through project 11215017, National Key RD Project of China (2018YFE0201603), and Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major Project (2017SHZDZX01) (L.S.

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc

Thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications of COVID-19 in adults hospitalized in high-income countries compared with those in adults hospitalized in low- and middle-income countries in an international registry

Background: COVID-19 has been associated with a broad range of thromboembolic, ischemic, and hemorrhagic complications (coagulopathy complications). Most studies have focused on patients with severe disease from high-income countries (HICs). Objectives: The main aims were to compare the frequency of coagulopathy complications in developing countries (low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) with those in HICs, delineate the frequency across a range of treatment levels, and determine associations with in-hospital mortality. Methods: Adult patients enrolled in an observational, multinational registry, the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections COVID-19 study, between January 1, 2020, and September 15, 2021, met inclusion criteria, including admission to a hospital for laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 and data on complications and survival. The advanced-treatment cohort received care, such as admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or inotropes or vasopressors; the basic-treatment cohort did not receive any of these interventions. Results: The study population included 495,682 patients from 52 countries, with 63% from LMICs and 85% in the basic treatment cohort. The frequency of coagulopathy complications was higher in HICs (0.76%-3.4%) than in LMICs (0.09%-1.22%). Complications were more frequent in the advanced-treatment cohort than in the basic-treatment cohort. Coagulopathy complications were associated with increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.52-1.64). The increased mortality associated with these complications was higher in LMICs (58.5%) than in HICs (35.4%). After controlling for coagulopathy complications, treatment intensity, and multiple other factors, the mortality was higher among patients in LMICs than among patients in HICs (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.39-1.51). Conclusion: In a large, international registry of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, coagulopathy complications were more frequent in HICs than in LMICs (developing countries). Increased mortality associated with coagulopathy complications was of a greater magnitude among patients in LMICs. Additional research is needed regarding timely diagnosis of and intervention for coagulation derangements associated with COVID-19, particularly for limited-resource settings

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83-7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97-2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14-1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25-1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable