A prenylated dsRNA sensor protects against severe COVID-19

Inherited genetic factors can influence the severity of COVID-19, but the molecular explanation underpinning a genetic association is often unclear. Intracellular antiviral defenses can inhibit the replication of viruses and reduce disease severity. To better understand the antiviral defenses relevant to COVID-19, we used interferon-stimulated gene (ISG) expression screening to reveal that OAS1, through RNase L, potently inhibits SARS-CoV-2. We show that a common splice-acceptor SNP (Rs10774671) governs whether people express prenylated OAS1 isoforms that are membrane-associated and sense specific regions of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs, or only express cytosolic, nonprenylated OAS1 that does not efficiently detect SARS-CoV-2. Importantly, in hospitalized patients, expression of prenylated OAS1 was associated with protection from severe COVID-19, suggesting this antiviral defense is a major component of a protective antiviral response

Telemedicine in Urogynecology

Telemedicine, which provides safe, equitable, patient-centered care, has gained significant momentum in recent years. Success using telemedicine has been seen across diverse groups of patients for a variety of diagnoses, including older adults and gynecology patients. In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, federal and local governments have issued provisions to improve reimbursement and accessibility to telemedicine. In urogynecology, virtual care is growing in popularity, along with a growing body of literature in support of this method of providing care. Providers should use clinical judgment and existing data to guide them on which clinical conditions are appropriate for virtual care

Review of Endometrial Receptivity Array: A Personalized Approach to Embryo Transfer and Its Clinical Applications

Successful outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) rely on both the formation of a chromosomally normal embryo and its implantation in a receptive endometrium. Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been widely accepted as a tool to assess the viability of an embryo. In 2011, the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) was first published as a tool to determine when the endometrium is most receptive to an embryo, commonly referred to as the window of implantation (WOI). The ERA uses molecular arrays to assess proliferation and differentiation in the endometrium and screens for inflammatory markers. Unlike PGT-A, there has been dissent within the field concerning the efficacy of the ERA. Many studies that contest the success of the ERA found that it did not improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with an already-good prognosis. Alternatively, studies that utilized the ERA in patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) and transfer of known euploid embryos demonstrated improved outcomes. This review aims to describe the ERA as a novel technique, review the various settings that the ERA may be used in, such as natural frozen embryo transfer (nFET) and hormone replacement therapy frozen embryo transfer (HRT-FET), and provide a summary of the recent clinical data for embryo transfers in patients with RIF utilizing the ERA

Inadequacy and Underreporting of Study Subjects\u27 Race and Ethnicity in Federally Funded Pelvic Floor Research

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of participants who are Black, Indigenous people of color, and participants of various ethnicities is a priority of federally sponsored research. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the reporting of race and ethnicity in federally funded research published by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development-funded Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. STUDY DESIGN: Pelvic Floor Disorders Network publications were reviewed to determine whether race or ethnicity was reported. The number of participants included in each manuscript who were identified as White, Black, Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and other, and the number of participants who identified as having Hispanic ethnicity were recorded. Data were analyzed by publication and by the pelvic floor disorder investigated, including urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, fecal incontinence, pregnancy-related pelvic floor disorders, and multiple pelvic floor disorders. Many publications reported on overlapping patient populations, which included primary trials and secondary analyses and studies. Data were analyzed both by counting participants every time they were reported in all papers and by counting the unique number of participants in only the original trials (primary paper published). RESULTS: A total of 132 Pelvic Floor Disorders Network publications were published between 2003 and 2020. Of these, 21 were excluded because they were methods papers or described research without participants. Of the 111 remaining articles, 90 (81%) included descriptions of race and 55 (50%) included descriptions of ethnicity. All 13 primary trials described race and 10 of 13 (76.9%) described ethnicity. Of those publications that described race, 50 of 90 (56%) included only the categories of White, Black, and Other, and 14 of 90 (16%) only described the percentage of White patients. Of the 49,218 subjects, there were 43,058 (87%) with reported race and 27,468 (56%) with reported ethnicity. Among subjects with race and ethnicity reported, 79% were reported as White, 9.9% as Black, 0.4% as Asian, 0.1% as American Indian or Alaska Native, and 4% as other, whereas 13% were reported to be of Hispanic ethnicity. The racial and ethnic diversity varied based on the pelvic floor disorder studied (P CONCLUSION: Federally funded Pelvic Floor Disorders Network research does not consistently report the race and ethnicity of participants. Even in the publications that report these characteristics, Black, Indigenous people of color, and people of Hispanic ethnicity are underrepresented. Consistent reporting and recruitment of a diverse population of women is necessary to address this systemic inequity

Anticipated Impact of Dobbs V Jackson Women\u27s Health Organization on Training of Resident/Fellows in Obstetrics and Gynecology: A Qualitative Analysis

BACKGROUND: On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of ended constitutional protection for abortion, thus severely restricting access to reproductive health care for millions of individuals. Concerns have arisen about the potential impact on medical students, Resident/Fellows, and fellows training in restricted areas and the effect on gynecologic training and the future provision of competent comprehensive women\u27s health care in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively explore the anticipated impacts of the ruling on training in obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN). METHODS: A participatory action research approach employing methods of qualitative analysis was used. Trainees and leaders in national OB/GYN professional and academic organizations with missions related to clinical care and training of medical students, Resident/Fellows, and fellows in OB/GYN participated. Two focus groups were held via Zoom in July 2022. Using an iterative process, transcripts underwent coding by 2 independent researchers to identify categories and common themes. Themes were organized into categories and subcategories. An additional reviewer resolved discrepancies. RESULTS: Twenty-six OB/GYN leaders/stakeholders representing 14 OB/GYN societies along with 4 trainees participated. Eight thematic categories were identified: competency, provision of reproductive health care, residency selection, inequity in training, alternative training, law-based vs evidence-based medicine, morality and ethics, and uncertainty about next steps. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study of leaders and learners in OB/GYN identified 8 themes of potential impacts of the ruling on current and future training in OB/GYN