12 research outputs found
Maternal vaccination against COVID-19 and neonatal outcomes during Omicron: INTERCOVID-2022 study
Background: In early 2023, when Omicron was the variant of concern, we showed that vaccinating pregnant women decreased the risk for severe COVID-19-related complications and maternal morbidity and mortality. Objective: This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy on newborns and the effects of maternal COVID-19 vaccination on neonatal outcomes when Omicron was the variant of concern. Study design: INTERCOVID-2022 was a large, prospective, observational study, conducted in 40 hospitals across 18 countries, from November 27, 2021 (the day after the World Health Organization declared Omicron the variant of concern) to June 30, 2022, to assess the effect of COVID-19 in pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes and to assess vaccine effectiveness. Women diagnosed with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during pregnancy were compared with 2 nondiagnosed, unmatched women recruited concomitantly and consecutively during pregnancy or at delivery. Mother-newborn dyads were followed until hospital discharge. The primary outcomes were a neonatal positive test for COVID-19, severe neonatal morbidity index, severe perinatal morbidity and mortality index, preterm birth, neonatal death, referral to neonatal intensive care unit, and diseases during the neonatal period. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated with adjustment for maternal risk profile. Results: We enrolled 4707 neonates born to 1577 (33.5%) mothers diagnosed with COVID-19 and 3130 (66.5%) nondiagnosed mothers. Among the diagnosed mothers, 642 (40.7%) were not vaccinated, 147 (9.3%) were partially vaccinated, 551 (34.9%) were completely vaccinated, and 237 (15.0%) also had a booster vaccine. Neonates of booster-vaccinated mothers had less than half (relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.91) the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 when compared with those of unvaccinated mothers; they also had the lowest rates of preterm birth, medically indicated preterm birth, respiratory distress syndrome, and number of days in the neonatal intensive care unit. Newborns of unvaccinated mothers had double the risk for neonatal death (relative risk, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-4.00) when compared with those of nondiagnosed mothers. Vaccination was not associated with any congenital malformations. Although all vaccines provided protection against neonatal test positivity, newborns of booster-vaccinated mothers had the highest vaccine effectiveness (64%; 95% confidence interval, 10%-86%). Vaccine effectiveness was not as high for messenger RNA vaccines only. Vaccine effectiveness against moderate or severe neonatal outcomes was much lower, namely 13% in the booster-vaccinated group (all vaccines) and 25% and 28% in the completely and booster-vaccinated groups, respectively (messenger RNA vaccines only). Vaccines were fairly effective in protecting neonates when given to pregnant women ≤100 days (14 weeks) before birth; thereafter, the risk increased and was much higher after 200 days (29 weeks). Finally, none of the neonatal practices studied, including skin-to-skin contact and direct breastfeeding, increased the risk for infecting newborns. Conclusion: When Omicron was the variant of concern, newborns of unvaccinated mothers had an increased risk for neonatal death. Neonates of vaccinated mothers had a decreased risk for preterm birth and adverse neonatal outcomes. Because the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination decreases with time, to ensure that newborns are maximally protected against COVID-19, mothers should receive a vaccine or booster dose no more than 14 weeks before the expected date of delivery
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)
In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field
Photochemical Fingerprinting Is a Sensitive Probe for the Detection of Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists; toward Robust Point-of-Care Detection
With synthetic cannabinoid
receptor agonist (SCRA) use still prevalent
across Europe and structurally advanced generations emerging, it is
imperative that drug detection methods advance in parallel. SCRAs
are a chemically diverse and evolving group, which makes rapid detection
challenging. We have previously shown that fluorescence spectral fingerprinting
(FSF) has the potential to provide rapid assessment of SCRA presence
directly from street material with minimal processing and in saliva.
Enhancing the sensitivity and discriminatory ability of this approach
has high potential to accelerate the delivery of a point-of-care technology
that can be used confidently by a range of stakeholders, from medical
to prison staff. We demonstrate that a range of structurally distinct
SCRAs are photochemically active and give rise to distinct FSFs after
irradiation. To explore this in detail, we have synthesized a model
series of compounds which mimic specific structural features of AM-694.
Our data show that FSFs are sensitive to chemically conservative changes,
with evidence that this relates to shifts in the electronic structure
and cross-conjugation. Crucially, we find that the photochemical degradation
rate is sensitive to individual structures and gives rise to a specific
major product, the mechanism and identification of which we elucidate
through density-functional theory (DFT) and time-dependent DFT. We
test the potential of our hybrid “photochemical fingerprinting”
approach to discriminate SCRAs by demonstrating SCRA detection from
a simulated smoking apparatus in saliva. Our study shows the potential
of tracking photochemical reactivity via FSFs for enhanced discrimination
of SCRAs, with successful integration into a portable device
Local Excitation of the 5-Bromouracil Chromophore in DNA. Computational and UV Spectroscopic Studies
Dark Matter Line Searches with the Cherenkov Telescope Array
International audienceMonochromatic gamma-ray signals constitute a potential smoking gun signature for annihilating or decaying dark matter particles that could relatively easily be distinguished from astrophysical or instrumental backgrounds. We provide an updated assessment of the sensitivity of the Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) to such signals, based on observations of the Galactic centre region as well as of selected dwarf spheroidal galaxies. We find that current limits and detection prospects for dark matter masses above 300 GeV will be significantly improved, by up to an order of magnitude in the multi-TeV range. This demonstrates that CTA will set a new standard for gamma-ray astronomy also in this respect, as the world's largest and most sensitive high-energy gamma-ray observatory, in particular due to its exquisite energy resolution at TeV energies and the adopted observational strategy focussing on regions with large dark matter densities. Throughout our analysis, we use up-to-date instrument response functions, and we thoroughly model the effect of instrumental systematic uncertainties in our statistical treatment. We further present results for other potential signatures with sharp spectral features, e.g.~box-shaped spectra, that would likewise very clearly point to a particle dark matter origin
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field