Optimized testing strategy for the diagnosis of GAA-FGF14 ataxia/spinocerebellar ataxia 27B

Dominantly inherited GAA repeat expansions in FGF14 are a common cause of spinocerebellar ataxia (GAA-FGF14 ataxia; spinocerebellar ataxia 27B). Molecular confirmation of FGF14 GAA repeat expansions has thus far mostly relied on long-read sequencing, a technology that is not yet widely available in clinical laboratories. We developed and validated a strategy to detect FGF14 GAA repeat expansions using long-range PCR, bidirectional repeat-primed PCRs, and Sanger sequencing. We compared this strategy to targeted nanopore sequencing in a cohort of 22 French Canadian patients and next validated it in a cohort of 53 French index patients with unsolved ataxia. Method comparison showed that capillary electrophoresis of long-range PCR amplification products significantly underestimated expansion sizes compared to nanopore sequencing (slope, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.93]; intercept, 14.58 [95% CI, − 2.48 to 31.12]) and gel electrophoresis (slope, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.97]; intercept, 21.34 [95% CI, − 27.66 to 40.22]). The latter techniques yielded similar size estimates. Following calibration with internal controls, expansion size estimates were similar between capillary electrophoresis and nanopore sequencing (slope: 0.98 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.04]; intercept: 10.62 [95% CI, − 7.49 to 27.71]), and gel electrophoresis (slope: 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09]; intercept: 18.81 [95% CI, − 41.93 to 39.15]). Diagnosis was accurately confirmed for all 22 French Canadian patients using this strategy. We also identified 9 French patients (9/53; 17%) and 2 of their relatives who carried an FGF14 (GAA)≥250 expansion. This novel strategy reliably detected and sized FGF14 GAA expansions, and compared favorably to long-read sequencing

Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced mortality: Findings from the observational multicentre Italian CORIST study

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was proposed as potential treatment for COVID-19. Objective: We set-up a multicenter Italian collaboration to investigate the relationship between HCQ therapy and COVID-19 in-hospital mortality. Methods: In a retrospective observational study, 3,451 unselected patients hospitalized in 33 clinical centers in Italy, from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were analyzed. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received HCQ with patients who did not. We used multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models with inverse probability for treatment weighting by propensity scores, with the addition of subgroup analyses. Results: Out of 3,451 COVID-19 patients, 76.3% received HCQ. Death rates (per 1,000 person-days) for patients receiving or not HCQ were 8.9 and 15.7, respectively. After adjustment for propensity scores, we found 30% lower risk of death in patients receiving HCQ (HR=0.70; 95%CI: 0.59 to 0.84; E-value=1.67). Secondary analyses yielded similar results. The inverse association of HCQ with inpatient mortality was particularly evident in patients having elevated C-reactive protein at entry. Conclusions: HCQ use was associated with a 30% lower risk of death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Within the limits of an observational study and awaiting results from randomized controlled trials, these data do not discourage the use of HCQ in inpatients with COVID-19

Experimental determination of the permeability of engineering textiles: Benchmark II

In this second international permeability benchmark, the in-plane permeability values of a carbon fabric were studied by twelve research groups worldwide. One participant also investigated the deformation of the tested carbon fabric. The aim of this work was to obtain comparable results in order to make a step toward standardization of permeability measurements. Unidirectional injections were thus conducted to determine the unsaturated in-plane permeability tensor of the fabric. Procedures used by participants were specified in the guidelines defined for this benchmark. Participants were asked to use the same values for parameters such as fiber volume fraction, injection pressure and fluid viscosity to minimize sources of scatter. The comparison of the results from each participant was encouraging. The scatter between data obtained while respecting the guidelines was below 25%. However, a higher dispersion was observed when some parameters differed from the recommendations of this exercise.The authors are grateful to J.M. Beraud from Hexcel Fabrics for his support that made possible this exercise. The contributions of J.B. Alms, N.C. Correia, S. Advani, E. Ruiz and P.C.T. Goncalves to the preparation of the guidelines document and templates are acknowledged by the participants of this benchmark.Vernet, N.; Ruiz, E.; Advani, S.; Alms, JB.; Aubert, M.; Barburski, M.; Barari, B.... (2014). Experimental determination of the permeability of engineering textiles: Benchmark II. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing. 61:172-184. doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.02.010S1721846

Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Darunavir/Cobicistat in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Findings From the Multicenter Italian CORIST Study

Background: Protease inhibitors have been considered as possible therapeutic agents for COVID-19 patients. Objectives: To describe the association between lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) or darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c) use and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. Study Design: Multicenter observational study of COVID-19 patients admitted in 33 Italian hospitals. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Patients were retrospectively divided in three groups, according to use of LPV/r, DRV/c or none of them. Primary outcome in a time-to event analysis was death. We used Cox proportional-hazards models with inverse probability of treatment weighting by multinomial propensity scores. Results: Out of 3,451 patients, 33.3% LPV/r and 13.9% received DRV/c. Patients receiving LPV/r or DRV/c were more likely younger, men, had higher C-reactive protein levels while less likely had hypertension, cardiovascular, pulmonary or kidney disease. After adjustment for propensity scores, LPV/r use was not associated with mortality (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13), whereas treatment with DRV/c was associated with a higher death risk (HR = 1.89, 1.53 to 2.34, E-value = 2.43). This increased risk was more marked in women, in elderly, in patients with higher severity of COVID-19 and in patients receiving other COVID-19 drugs. Conclusions: In a large cohort of Italian patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in a real-life setting, the use of LPV/r treatment did not change death rate, while DRV/c was associated with increased mortality. Within the limits of an observational study, these data do not support the use of LPV/r or DRV/c in COVID-19 patients