Utilizing high-throughput experimentation to enhance specific productivity of an E.coli T7 expression system by phosphate limitation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The specific productivity of cultivation processes can be optimized, amongst others, by using genetic engineering of strains, choice of suitable host/vector systems or process optimization (e.g. choosing the right induction time). A further possibility is to reduce biomass buildup in favor of an enhanced product formation, e.g. by limiting secondary substrates in the medium, such as phosphate. However, with conventional techniques (e.g. small scale cultivations in shake flasks), it is very tedious to establish optimal conditions for cell growth and protein expression, as the start of protein expression (induction time) and the degree of phosphate limitation have to be determined in numerous concerted, manually conducted experiments.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We investigated the effect of different induction times and a concurrent phosphate limitation on the specific productivity of the T7 expression system <it>E.coli </it>BL21(DE3) pRhotHi-2-EcFbFP, which produces the model fluorescence protein EcFbFP upon induction. Therefore, specific online-monitoring tools for small scale cultivations (RAMOS, BioLector) as well as a novel cultivation platform (Robo-Lector) were used for rapid process optimization. The RAMOS system monitored the oxygen transfer rate in shake flasks, whereas the BioLector device allowed to monitor microbial growth and the production of EcFbFP in microtiter plates. The Robo-Lector is a combination of a BioLector and a pipetting robot and can conduct high-throughput experiments fully automated. By using these tools, it was possible to determine the optimal induction time and to increase the specific productivity for EcFbFP from 22% (for unlimited conditions) to 31% of total protein content of the <it>E.coli </it>cells via a phosphate limitation.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results revealed that a phosphate limitation at the right induction time was suitable to redirect the available cellular resources during cultivation to protein expression rather than in biomass production. To our knowledge, such an effect was shown for the first time for an IPTG-inducible expression system. Finally, this finding and the utilization of the introduced high-throughput experimentation approach could help to find new targets to further enhance the production capacity of recombinant <it>E.coli</it>-strains.</p

Patterns of antibiotic use, pathogens, and prediction of mortality in hospitalized neonates and young infants with sepsis: A global neonatal sepsis observational cohort study (NeoOBS)

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on antibiotic treatment in hospitalized neonates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to describe patterns of antibiotic use, pathogens, and clinical outcomes, and to develop a severity score predicting mortality in neonatal sepsis to inform future clinical trial design. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Hospitalized infants <60 days with clinical sepsis were enrolled during 2018 to 2020 by 19 sites in 11 countries (mainly Asia and Africa). Prospective daily observational data was collected on clinical signs, supportive care, antibiotic treatment, microbiology, and 28-day mortality. Two prediction models were developed for (1) 28-day mortality from baseline variables (baseline NeoSep Severity Score); and (2) daily risk of death on IV antibiotics from daily updated assessments (NeoSep Recovery Score). Multivariable Cox regression models included a randomly selected 85% of infants, with 15% for validation. A total of 3,204 infants were enrolled, with median birth weight of 2,500 g (IQR 1,400 to 3,000) and postnatal age of 5 days (IQR 1 to 15). 206 different empiric antibiotic combinations were started in 3,141 infants, which were structured into 5 groups based on the World Health Organization (WHO) AWaRe classification. Approximately 25.9% (n = 814) of infants started WHO first line regimens (Group 1-Access) and 13.8% (n = 432) started WHO second-line cephalosporins (cefotaxime/ceftriaxone) (Group 2-"Low" Watch). The largest group (34.0%, n = 1,068) started a regimen providing partial extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)/pseudomonal coverage (piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftazidime, or fluoroquinolone-based) (Group 3-"Medium" Watch), 18.0% (n = 566) started a carbapenem (Group 4-"High" Watch), and 1.8% (n = 57) a Reserve antibiotic (Group 5, largely colistin-based), and 728/2,880 (25.3%) of initial regimens in Groups 1 to 4 were escalated, mainly to carbapenems, usually for clinical deterioration (n = 480; 65.9%). A total of 564/3,195 infants (17.7%) were blood culture pathogen positive, of whom 62.9% (n = 355) had a gram-negative organism, predominantly Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 132) or Acinetobacter spp. (n = 72). Both were commonly resistant to WHO-recommended regimens and to carbapenems in 43 (32.6%) and 50 (71.4%) of cases, respectively. MRSA accounted for 33 (61.1%) of 54 Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Overall, 350/3,204 infants died (11.3%; 95% CI 10.2% to 12.5%), 17.7% if blood cultures were positive for pathogens (95% CI 14.7% to 21.1%, n = 99/564). A baseline NeoSep Severity Score had a C-index of 0.76 (0.69 to 0.82) in the validation sample, with mortality of 1.6% (3/189; 95% CI: 0.5% to 4.6%), 11.0% (27/245; 7.7% to 15.6%), and 27.3% (12/44; 16.3% to 41.8%) in low (score 0 to 4), medium (5 to 8), and high (9 to 16) risk groups, respectively, with similar performance across subgroups. A related NeoSep Recovery Score had an area under the receiver operating curve for predicting death the next day between 0.8 and 0.9 over the first week. There was significant variation in outcomes between sites and external validation would strengthen score applicability. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic regimens used in neonatal sepsis commonly diverge from WHO guidelines, and trials of novel empiric regimens are urgently needed in the context of increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The baseline NeoSep Severity Score identifies high mortality risk criteria for trial entry, while the NeoSep Recovery Score can help guide decisions on regimen change. NeoOBS data informed the NeoSep1 antibiotic trial (ISRCTN48721236), which aims to identify novel first- and second-line empiric antibiotic regimens for neonatal sepsis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, (NCT03721302)

Mortality of emergency abdominal surgery in high-, middle- and low-income countries

Background: Surgical mortality data are collected routinely in high-income countries, yet virtually no low- or middle-income countries have outcome surveillance in place. The aim was prospectively to collect worldwide mortality data following emergency abdominal surgery, comparing findings across countries with a low, middle or high Human Development Index (HDI). Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, cohort study. Self-selected hospitals performing emergency surgery submitted prespecified data for consecutive patients from at least one 2-week interval during July to December 2014. Postoperative mortality was analysed by hierarchical multivariable logistic regression. Results: Data were obtained for 10 745 patients from 357 centres in 58 countries; 6538 were from high-, 2889 from middle- and 1318 from low-HDI settings. The overall mortality rate was 1⋅6 per cent at 24 h (high 1⋅1 per cent, middle 1⋅9 per cent, low 3⋅4 per cent; P < 0⋅001), increasing to 5⋅4 per cent by 30 days (high 4⋅5 per cent, middle 6⋅0 per cent, low 8⋅6 per cent; P < 0⋅001). Of the 578 patients who died, 404 (69⋅9 per cent) did so between 24 h and 30 days following surgery (high 74⋅2 per cent, middle 68⋅8 per cent, low 60⋅5 per cent). After adjustment, 30-day mortality remained higher in middle-income (odds ratio (OR) 2⋅78, 95 per cent c.i. 1⋅84 to 4⋅20) and low-income (OR 2⋅97, 1⋅84 to 4⋅81) countries. Surgical safety checklist use was less frequent in low- and middle-income countries, but when used was associated with reduced mortality at 30 days. Conclusion: Mortality is three times higher in low- compared with high-HDI countries even when adjusted for prognostic factors. Patient safety factors may have an important role. Registration number: NCT02179112 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Receipt of Survivorship Care Plans and Self-Reported Health Status among Patients with Genitourinary Malignancy.

PURPOSE: Implementation of survivorship care plans has been emphasized as a key component to improving care for cancer survivors. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of survivorship care plan receipt for survivors of genitourinary malignancy including kidney, prostate and bladder cancer, and evaluate whether receipt was associated with a measurable health benefit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Cancer Survivorship modules in 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 were analyzed. The proportion of patients with bladder, kidney or prostate cancer receiving a survivorship care plan was calculated. Complex samples multivariable logistic regressions were performed to determine the association of survivorship care plan receipt with sociodemographic variables, and assess the relationship between survivorship care plan receipt and self-reported health status (general, physical and mental). RESULTS: Survivorship care plan distribution increased from 27.5% in 2012 to 39.5% in 2017. Patients with low income, less formal education and extremes of age were less likely to receive a survivorship care plan. Those receiving a survivorship care plan were less likely to report poor physical health (OR 0.70, CI 0.52-0.96, p=0.026). Subanalysis showed a similar result for physical health of patients with prostate cancer (OR 0.68, CI 0.48-0.96, p=0.030) and general health of patients with kidney cancer (OR 0.37, CI 0.19-0.75, p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of survivorship care plans to genitourinary malignancy survivors has increased since 2012 in response to advocacy from national organizations. Nonetheless, utilization is low and there is heterogeneity in the populations likely to receive a survivorship care plan. There is a measurable association between survivorship care plans and improved health status but further study is needed to determine causality