Polygenic risk scores have high diagnostic capacity in ankylosing spondylitis

We would like to thank all participating subjects with AS and healthy individuals who provided the DNA and clinical information necessary for this study. The TASC study was funded by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) grants P01-052915, R01-AR046208. Funding was also received from the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston CTSA grant UL1RR02418, Cedars-Sinai GCRC grant MO1-RR00425, Intramural Research Program, NIAMS/NIH, and Rebecca Cooper Foundation (Australia). This study was funded, in part, by Arthritis Research UK (Grants 19536 and 18797), by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 076113), and by the Oxford Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre ankylosing spondylitis chronic disease cohort (Theme Code: A91202). JZB was funded by a grant from the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (LD18H120001LD). The New Zealand data was derived from participants in the Spondyloarthritis Genetics and the Environment Study (SAGE) and was funded by The Health Research Council, New Zealand. HX was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 81430031) and China Ministry of Science and Technology (973 Program of China 2014CB541800). We acknowledge the Understanding Society: The UK Household Longitudinal Study. This is led by the Institute for Social and Economic Research at the University of Essex and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. The survey was conducted by NatCen and the genome-wide scan data were analysed and deposited by the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. Information on how to access the data can be found on the Understanding Society website https: www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/. French sample collection was performed by the Groupe Française d’Etude Génétique des Spondylarthrites, coordinated by Professor Maxime Breban and funded by the Agence Nationale de Recherche GEMISA grant reference ANR-10-MIDI-0002. We acknowledge and thank the TCRI AS Group for their support in recruiting patients for the study (see below). The authors acknowledge the sharing of data and samples by the BSRBR-AS Register in Aberdeen. Chief Investigator, Prof Gary Macfarlane and Dr. Gareth Jones, Deputy Chief Investigator created the BSRBR-AS study which was commissioned by the British Society for Rheumatology, funded in part by Abbvie, Pfizer and UCB. We are grateful to every patient, past and present staff of the BSRBR-AS register team and to all clinical staff who recruited patients, followed them up and entered data – details here: https://www.abdn.ac.uk/iahs/research/epidemiology/spondyloarthritis.php#panel1011. The QIMR control samples were from parents of adolescent twins collected in the context of the Brisbane Longitudinal Twin Study 1992–2016, support by grants from NHMRC (NGM) and ARC (MJW). We thank Anjali Henders, Lisa Bowdler, Tabatha Goncales for biobank collection and Kerrie McAloney and Scott Gordon for curating samples for this study. MAB is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) Senior Principal Research Fellowship (1024879), and support for this study was received from a National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) program grant (566938) and project grant (569829), and from the Australian Cancer Research Foundation and Rebecca Cooper Medical Research Foundation. We are also very grateful for the invaluable support received from the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society (UK) and Spondyloarthritis Association of America in case recruitment. Additional financial and technical support for patient recruitment was provided by the National Institute for Health Research Oxford Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit and NIHR Thames Valley Comprehensive Local Research and an unrestricted educational grant from Abbott Laboratories. This research was funded/supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London and/or the NIHR Clinical Research Facility. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Development and Application of Microsatellites in Carcinus maenas: Genetic Differentiation between Northern and Central Portuguese Populations

Carcinus maenas, the common shore crab of European coastal waters, has recently gained notoriety due to its globally invasive nature associated with drastic ecological and economic effects. The native ubiquity and worldwide importance of C. maenas has resulted in it becoming one of the best-studied estuarine crustacean species globally. Accordingly, there is significant interest in investigating the population genetic structure of this broadly distributed crab along European and invaded coastlines. Here, we developed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primers for one dinucleotide and two trinucleotide microsatellite loci, resulting from an enrichment process based on Portuguese populations. Combining these three new markers with six existing markers, we examined levels of genetic diversity and population structure of C. maenas in two coastal regions from Northern and Central Portugal. Genotypes showed that locus polymorphism ranged from 10 to 42 alleles (N = 135) and observed heterozygosity per locus ranged from 0.745 to 0.987 with expected heterozygosity ranging from 0.711 to 0.960; values typical of marine decapods. The markers revealed weak, but significant structuring among populations (global FST = 0.004) across a 450 km (over-water distance) spatial scale. Combinations of these and existing markers will be useful for studying population genetic parameters at a range of spatial scales of C. maenas throughout its expanding species range

Psychological correlates of self-reported functional limitation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

Abstract Introduction Functional status is an integral component of health-related quality of life in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of psychological variables in self-reported functional limitation in patients with AS, while controlling for demographic and medical variables. Methods 294 AS patients meeting modified New York Criteria completed psychological measures evaluating depression, resilience, active and passive coping, internality and helplessness at the baseline visit. Demographic, clinical, and radiologic data were also collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses were completed to determine the strength of correlation of psychological variables with functional limitation, as measured by the Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI). Results In the multivariate regression analysis, the psychological variables contributed significantly to the variance in BASFI scores, adding an additional 24% to the overall R-square beyond that accounted by demographic and medical variables (R-square 32%), resulting in a final R-square of 56%. Specifically, arthritis helplessness, depression and passive coping beside age, ESR and the Bath AS Radiograph Index accounted for a significant portion of the variance in BASFI scores in the final model. Conclusions Arthritis helplessness, depression, and passive coping accounted for significant variability in self-reported functional limitation beyond demographic and clinical variables in patients with AS. Psychological health should be examined and accounted for when assessing functional status in the AS patients

Changing the Culture of Peer Review for a More Inclusive and Equitable Psychological Science

Peer review is a core component of scientific practice. Although peer review ideally improves research and promotes rigor, it also has consequences for what types of research are published and cited and who wants to (and is able to) advance in research-focused careers. Despite these consequences, few reviewers or editors receive training or oversight to ensure their feedback is helpful, professional, and culturally sensitive. Here, we critically examine the peer-review system in psychology and neuroscience at multiple levels, from ideas to institutions, interactions, and individuals. We highlight initiatives that aim to change the normative negativity of peer review and provide authors with constructive, actionable feedback that is sensitive to diverse identities, methods, topics, and environments. We conclude with a call to action for how individuals, groups, and organizations can improve the culture of peer review. We provide examples of how changes in the peer-review system can be made with an eye to diversity (increasing the range of identities and experiences constituting the field), equity (fair processes and outcomes across groups), and inclusion (experiences that promote belonging across groups). These changes can improve scientists' experience of peer review, promote diverse perspectives and identities, and enhance the quality and impact of science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)