Genetics of the thrombomodulin-endothelial cell protein C receptor system and the risk of early-onset ischemic stroke

Background and purpose Polymorphisms in coagulation genes have been associated with early-onset ischemic stroke. Here we pursue an a priori hypothesis that genetic variation in the endothelial-based receptors of the thrombomodulin-protein C system (THBD and PROCR) may similarly be associated with early-onset ischemic stroke. We explored this hypothesis utilizing a multi-tage design of discovery and replication. Methods Discovery was performed in the Genetics-of-Early-Onset Stroke (GEOS) Study, a biracial population-based case-control study of ischemic stroke among men and women aged 1549 including 829 cases of first ischemic stroke (42.2% African-American) and 850 age-comparable stroke-free controls (38.1% African-American). Twenty-four single-nucleotide-polymorphisms (SNPs) in THBD and 22 SNPs in PROCR were evaluated. Following LD pruning (r(2)>= 0.8), we advanced uncorrelated SNPs forward for association analyses. Associated SNPs were evaluated for replication in an early-onset ischemic stroke population (onset-ge Results Among GEOS Caucasians, PROCR rs9574, which was in strong LD with 8 other SNPs, and one additional independent SNP rs2069951, were significantly associated with ischemic stroke (rs9574, OR = 1.33, p = 0.003; rs2069951, OR = 1.80, p = 0.006) using an additive-model adjusting for age, gender and population-structure. Adjusting for risk factors did not change the associations; however, associations were strengthened among those without risk factors. PROCR rs9574 also associated with early-onset ischemic stroke in the replication sample (OR = 1.08, p = 0.015), but not older-onset stroke. There were no PROCR associations in African-Americans, nor were there any THBD associations in either ethnicity. Conclusion PROCR polymorphisms are associated with early-onset ischemic stroke in Caucasians.Peer reviewe

Contribution of Common Genetic Variants to Risk of Early-Onset Ischemic Stroke

Background and Objectives Current genome-wide association studies of ischemic stroke have focused primarily on late-onset disease. As a complement to these studies, we sought to identify the contribution of common genetic variants to risk of early-onset ischemic stroke. Methods We performed a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies of early-onset stroke (EOS), ages 18-59 years, using individual-level data or summary statistics in 16,730 cases and 599,237 nonstroke controls obtained across 48 different studies. We further compared effect sizes at associated loci between EOS and late-onset stroke (LOS) and compared polygenic risk scores (PRS) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) between EOS and LOS. Results We observed genome-wide significant associations of EOS with 2 variants in ABO, a known stroke locus. These variants tag blood subgroups O1 and A1, and the effect sizes of both variants were significantly larger in EOS compared with LOS. The odds ratio (OR) for rs529565, tagging O1, was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85-0.91) in EOS vs 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92-1.00) in LOS, and the OR for rs635634, tagging A1, was 1.16 (1.11-1.21) for EOS vs 1.05 (0.99-1.11) in LOS; p-values for interaction = 0.001 and 0.005, respectively. Using PRSs, we observed that greater genetic risk for VTE, another prothrombotic condition, was more strongly associated with EOS compared with LOS (p = 0.008). Discussion The ABO locus, genetically predicted blood group A, and higher genetic propensity for venous thrombosis are more strongly associated with EOS than with LOS, supporting a stronger role of prothrombotic factors in EOS.Peer reviewe

NIST Interlaboratory Study on Glycosylation Analysis of Monoclonal Antibodies: Comparison of Results from Diverse Analytical Methods

Glycosylation is a topic of intense current interest in the development of biopharmaceuticals because it is related to drug safety and efficacy. This work describes results of an interlaboratory study on the glycosylation of the Primary Sample (PS) of NISTmAb, a monoclonal antibody reference material. Seventy-six laboratories from industry, university, research, government, and hospital sectors in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia submit- Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland 20993; 22Glycoscience Research Laboratory, Genos, Borongajska cesta 83h, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 23Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, A. Kovacˇ ic´ a 1, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 24Department of Chemistry, Georgia State University, 100 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30303; 25glyXera GmbH, Brenneckestrasse 20 * ZENIT / 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; 26Health Products and Foods Branch, Health Canada, AL 2201E, 251 Sir Frederick Banting Driveway, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0K9 Canada; 27Graduate School of Advanced Sciences of Matter, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama Higashi-Hiroshima 739–8530 Japan; 28ImmunoGen, 830 Winter Street, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451; 29Department of Medical Physiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Michalowskiego 12, 31–126 Krakow, Poland; 30Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, 400 N. Broadway Street Baltimore, Maryland 21287; 31Mass Spec Core Facility, KBI Biopharma, 1101 Hamlin Road Durham, North Carolina 27704; 32Division of Mass Spectrometry, Korea Basic Science Institute, 162 YeonGuDanji-Ro, Ochang-eup, Cheongwon-gu, Cheongju Chungbuk, 363–883 Korea (South); 33Advanced Therapy Products Research Division, Korea National Institute of Food and Drug Safety, 187 Osongsaengmyeong 2-ro Osong-eup, Heungdeok-gu, Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, 363–700, Korea (South); 34Center for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands; 35Ludger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3EB, United Kingdom; 36Biomolecular Discovery and Design Research Centre and ARC Centre of Excellence for Nanoscale BioPhotonics (CNBP), Macquarie University, North Ryde, Australia; 37Proteomics, Central European Institute for Technology, Masaryk University, Kamenice 5, A26, 625 00 BRNO, Czech Republic; 38Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstrasse 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; 39Department of Biomolecular Sciences, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, 14424 Potsdam, Germany; 40AstraZeneca, Granta Park, Cambridgeshire, CB21 6GH United Kingdom; 41Merck, 2015 Galloping Hill Rd, Kenilworth, New Jersey 07033; 42Analytical R&D, MilliporeSigma, 2909 Laclede Ave. St. Louis, Missouri 63103; 43MS Bioworks, LLC, 3950 Varsity Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108; 44MSD, Molenstraat 110, 5342 CC Oss, The Netherlands; 45Exploratory Research Center on Life and Living Systems (ExCELLS), National Institutes of Natural Sciences, 5–1 Higashiyama, Myodaiji, Okazaki 444–8787 Japan; 46Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nagoya City University, 3–1 Tanabe-dori, Mizuhoku, Nagoya 467–8603 Japan; 47Medical & Biological Laboratories Co., Ltd, 2-22-8 Chikusa, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464–0858 Japan; 48National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 3QG United Kingdom; 49Division of Biological Chemistry & Biologicals, National Institute of Health Sciences, 1-18-1 Kamiyoga, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 158–8501 Japan; 50New England Biolabs, Inc., 240 County Road, Ipswich, Massachusetts 01938; 51New York University, 100 Washington Square East New York City, New York 10003; 52Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, United Kingdom; 53GlycoScience Group, The National Institute for Bioprocessing Research and Training, Fosters Avenue, Mount Merrion, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland; 54Department of Chemistry, North Carolina State University, 2620 Yarborough Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27695; 55Pantheon, 201 College Road East Princeton, New Jersey 08540; 56Pfizer Inc., 1 Burtt Road Andover, Massachusetts 01810; 57Proteodynamics, ZI La Varenne 20–22 rue Henri et Gilberte Goudier 63200 RIOM, France; 58ProZyme, Inc., 3832 Bay Center Place Hayward, California 94545; 59Koichi Tanaka Mass Spectrometry Research Laboratory, Shimadzu Corporation, 1 Nishinokyo Kuwabara-cho Nakagyo-ku, Kyoto, 604 8511 Japan; 60Children’s GMP LLC, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Place Memphis, Tennessee 38105; 61Sumitomo Bakelite Co., Ltd., 1–5 Muromati 1-Chome, Nishiku, Kobe, 651–2241 Japan; 62Synthon Biopharmaceuticals, Microweg 22 P.O. Box 7071, 6503 GN Nijmegen, The Netherlands; 63Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., 40 Landsdowne Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; 64Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas Tech University, 2500 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas 79409; 65Thermo Fisher Scientific, 1214 Oakmead Parkway Sunnyvale, California 94085; 66United States Pharmacopeia India Pvt. Ltd. IKP Knowledge Park, Genome Valley, Shamirpet, Turkapally Village, Medchal District, Hyderabad 500 101 Telangana, India; 67Alberta Glycomics Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 68Department of Chemistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 69Department of Chemistry, University of California, One Shields Ave, Davis, California 95616; 70Horva´ th Csaba Memorial Laboratory for Bioseparation Sciences, Research Center for Molecular Medicine, Doctoral School of Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Egyetem ter 1, Hungary; 71Translational Glycomics Research Group, Research Institute of Biomolecular and Chemical Engineering, University of Pannonia, Veszprem, Egyetem ut 10, Hungary; 72Delaware Biotechnology Institute, University of Delaware, 15 Innovation Way Newark, Delaware 19711; 73Proteomics Core Facility, University of Gothenburg, Medicinaregatan 1G SE 41390 Gothenburg, Sweden; 74Department of Medical Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University of Gothenburg, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Medicinaregatan 9A, Box 440, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden; 75Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Bruna Straket 16, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; 76Department of Chemistry, University of Hamburg, Martin Luther King Pl. 6 20146 Hamburg, Germany; 77Department of Chemistry, University of Manitoba, 144 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2; 78Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry of Interactions and Systems, University of Strasbourg, UMR Unistra-CNRS 7140, France; 79Natural and Medical Sciences Institute, University of Tu¨ bingen, Markwiesenstrae 55, 72770 Reutlingen, Germany; 80Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands; 81Division of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Amsterdam Institute for Molecules, Medicines and Systems, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 82Department of Chemistry, Waters Corporation, 34 Maple Street Milford, Massachusetts 01757; 83Zoetis, 333 Portage St. Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007 Author’s Choice—Final version open access under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY license. Received July 24, 2019, and in revised form, August 26, 2019 Published, MCP Papers in Press, October 7, 2019, DOI 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677 ER: NISTmAb Glycosylation Interlaboratory Study 12 Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19.1 Downloaded from https://www.mcponline.org by guest on January 20, 2020 ted a total of 103 reports on glycan distributions. The principal objective of this study was to report and compare results for the full range of analytical methods presently used in the glycosylation analysis of mAbs. Therefore, participation was unrestricted, with laboratories choosing their own measurement techniques. Protein glycosylation was determined in various ways, including at the level of intact mAb, protein fragments, glycopeptides, or released glycans, using a wide variety of methods for derivatization, separation, identification, and quantification. Consequently, the diversity of results was enormous, with the number of glycan compositions identified by each laboratory ranging from 4 to 48. In total, one hundred sixteen glycan compositions were reported, of which 57 compositions could be assigned consensus abundance values. These consensus medians provide communityderived values for NISTmAb PS. Agreement with the consensus medians did not depend on the specific method or laboratory type. The study provides a view of the current state-of-the-art for biologic glycosylation measurement and suggests a clear need for harmonization of glycosylation analysis methods. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19: 11–30, 2020. DOI: 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677.L

Cohort Analysis of ADAM8 Expression in the PDAC Tumor Stroma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a cancer type with one of the highest mortalities. The metalloprotease-disintegrin ADAM8 is highly expressed in pancreatic cancer cells and is correlated with an unfavorable patient prognosis. However, no information is available on ADAM8 expression in cells of the tumor microenvironment. We used immunohistochemistry (IHC) to describe the stromal cell types expressing ADAM8 in PDAC patients using a cohort of 72 PDAC patients. We found ADAM8 expressed significantly in macrophages (6%), natural killer cells (40%), and neutrophils (63%), which showed the highest percentage of ADAM8 expressing stromal cells. We quantified the amount of ADAM8+ neutrophils in post-capillary venules in PDAC sections by IHC. Notably, the amount of ADAM8+ neutrophils could be correlated with post-operative patient survival times. In contrast, neither the total neutrophil count in peripheral blood nor the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio showed a comparable correlation. We conclude from our data that ADAM8 is, in addition to high expression levels in tumor cells, present in tumor-associated stromal macrophages, NK cells, and neutrophils and, in addition to functional implications, the ADAM8-expressing neutrophil density in post-capillary venules is a diagnostic parameter for PDAC patients when the numbers of ADAM8+ neutrophils are quantified

A Hashin-Shtrikman type semi-analytical homogenization procedure in multiscale modeling to account for coupled problems

Heterogeneous materials are important for a vast amount of applications e.g. in automotive industry or in aerospace. For instance, when producing components, it can be desired to use materials with a heterogeneous microstructure in order to achieve specific material properties. The resulting properties highly depend on the manufacturing process itself, which can involve mechanical and/or thermal loadings. Therefore, it is necessary to properly depict the microstructural material behavior in order to allow for the calibration of the manufacturing process and for the solution of the inverse problem. Constitutive models can be used to depict the material response in a simplified manner. These simplifications allow for a more flexible use of the model but restrict it to a certain range of applications. Thus, it is beneficial to take the material’s microscopic structure into account and couple its behavior to the macroscopical response. As multiscale methods (e.g. FE2 , FE-FFT) are computationally expensive, semi-analytical homogenization procedures are investigated to account for the transition between different length scales. There are various well known homogenization techniques discussed in literature such as e.g. the Voigt and Reuss bounds, the self-consistent method as well as the Mori-Tanaka method. In our presentation, the focus lies on a Hashin-Shtrikman type formulation in similarity with the one proposed by Wulfinghoff et al. (2018). This homogenization technique will then be applied to a heterogeneous elastoplastic material under mechanical and thermal loading. After presenting the homogenized material model, we will proof its applicability by various numerical calculations

Cohort Analysis of ADAM8 Expression in the PDAC Tumor Stroma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a cancer type with one of the highest mortalities. The metalloprotease-disintegrin ADAM8 is highly expressed in pancreatic cancer cells and is correlated with an unfavorable patient prognosis. However, no information is available on ADAM8 expression in cells of the tumor microenvironment. We used immunohistochemistry (IHC) to describe the stromal cell types expressing ADAM8 in PDAC patients using a cohort of 72 PDAC patients. We found ADAM8 expressed significantly in macrophages (6%), natural killer cells (40%), and neutrophils (63%), which showed the highest percentage of ADAM8 expressing stromal cells. We quantified the amount of ADAM8+ neutrophils in post-capillary venules in PDAC sections by IHC. Notably, the amount of ADAM8+ neutrophils could be correlated with post-operative patient survival times. In contrast, neither the total neutrophil count in peripheral blood nor the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio showed a comparable correlation. We conclude from our data that ADAM8 is, in addition to high expression levels in tumor cells, present in tumor-associated stromal macrophages, NK cells, and neutrophils and, in addition to functional implications, the ADAM8-expressing neutrophil density in post-capillary venules is a diagnostic parameter for PDAC patients when the numbers of ADAM8+ neutrophils are quantified

Particle emission rates during electrostatic spray deposition of TiO2 nanoparticle-based photoactive coating

Here, we studied the particle release rate during Electrostatic spray deposition of anatase-(TiO2)-based photoactive coating onto tiles and wallpaper using a commercially available electrostatic spray device. Spraying was performed in a 20.3m3 test chamber while measuring concentrations of 5.6nm to 31μm-size particles and volatile organic compounds (VOC), as well as particle deposition onto room surfaces and on the spray gun user hand. The particle emission and deposition rates were quantified using aerosol mass balance modelling. The geometric mean particle number emission rate was 1.9×1010s-1 and the mean mass emission rate was 381μgs-1. The respirable mass emission-rate was 65% lower than observed for the entire measured size-range. The mass emission rates were linearly scalable (±ca. 20%) to the process duration. The particle deposition rates were up to 15h-1 for <1 μm-size and the deposited particlesconsisted of mainly TiO2, TiO2 mixed with Cl and/or Ag, TiO2particles coated with carbon, and Ag particles with size ranging from 60 nm to ca. 5 μm. As expected, no significant VOC emissions were observed as a result of spraying. Finally, we provide recommendations for exposure model parameterization