A critical comparison of technologies for a plant genome sequencing project

BACKGROUND: A high-quality genome sequence of any model organism is an essential starting point for genetic and other studies. Older clone-based methods are slow and expensive, whereas faster, cheaper short-read-only assemblies can be incomplete and highly fragmented, which minimizes their usefulness. The last few years have seen the introduction of many new technologies for genome assembly. These new technologies and associated new algorithms are typically benchmarked on microbial genomes or, if they scale appropriately, on larger (e.g., human) genomes. However, plant genomes can be much more repetitive and larger than the human genome, and plant biochemistry often makes obtaining high-quality DNA that is free from contaminants difficult. Reflecting their challenging nature, we observe that plant genome assembly statistics are typically poorer than for vertebrates. RESULTS: Here, we compare Illumina short read, Pacific Biosciences long read, 10x Genomics linked reads, Dovetail Hi-C, and BioNano Genomics optical maps, singly and combined, in producing high-quality long-range genome assemblies of the potato species Solanum verrucosum. We benchmark the assemblies for completeness and accuracy, as well as DNA compute requirements and sequencing costs. CONCLUSIONS: The field of genome sequencing and assembly is reaching maturity, and the differences we observe between assemblies are surprisingly small. We expect that our results will be helpful to other genome projects, and that these datasets will be used in benchmarking by assembly algorithm developers.</p

Intracranial Stenosis: Impact of Randomized Trials on Treatment Preferences of US Neurologists and Neurointerventionists

Medical and endovascular treatment options for stroke prevention in patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis have evolved over the past several decades, but the impact of 2 major multi-center randomized stroke prevention trials on physician practices has not been studied. We sought to determine changes in US physician treatment choices for patients with intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) following 2 NIH-funded clinical trials that studied medical therapies (antithrombotic agents and risk factor control) and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS)

Periprocedural safety of saccular aneurysm embolization with the Penumbra SMART Coil System: a SMART registry subset analysis

Background Using data from the SMART registry, we report on periprocedural safety of the Penumbra SMART Coil System for endovascular coil embolization of saccular intracranial aneurysms. Methods The SMART registry was a prospective, multi-center registry of site standard of care endovascular coiling procedures performed using at least 75% Penumbra SMART Coil, PC400, and/or POD coils. This subset analysis reports on the periprocedural safety outcomes of the saccular intracranial aneurysm cohort. Predictors of rupture/re-rupture or perforation (RRP), thromboembolic complications, and device- or procedure-related adverse events (AEs) were determined in univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Between June 2016 and August 2018, 851 saccular aneurysm patients (31.0%, 264/851 ruptured) were enrolled across 66 North American centers. Clinically significant (ie, a serious adverse event) RRP occurred in 2.0% (17/851) of cases – 1.9% (5/264) for the ruptured cohort and 2.0% (12/587) for the un-ruptured cohort. Clinically significant thromboembolic events occurred in 3.1% (26/851) of cases – 5.3% (14/264) for the ruptured cohort and 2.0% (12/587) for the un-ruptured cohort. Multivariate predictors of periprocedural RRP were increased packing density and adjunctive treatment with a balloon. For periprocedural thromboembolic events, multivariate predictors were bifurcation location and ruptured status. For device- or procedure-related AEs, multivariate predictors were bifurcation location and adjunctive treatment with stent or balloon. Conclusion The low rates of thromboembolic complications and RRP events demonstrate the adequate safety profile of the SMART Coil System to treat cerebral aneurysms in routine clinical practice

P2Y12 inhibitors for the neurointerventionalist.

The use of antiplatelets is widespread in clinical practice. However, for neurointerventional procedures, protocols for antiplatelet use are scarce and practice varies between individuals and institutions. This is further complicated by the quantity of antiplatelet agents which differ in route of administration, dosage, onset of action, efficacy and ischemic and hemorrhagic complications. Clarifying the individual characteristics for each antiplatelet agent, and their associated risks, will increasingly become relevant as the practice of mechanical thrombectomy, stenting, coiling and flow diversion procedures grows. The aim of this review is to summarize the existing literature for the use of P2Y12 inhibitors in neurointerventional procedures, examine the quality of the evidence, and highlight areas in need of further research

Clinical profile of patients with ATP1A3 mutations in alternating hemiplegia of childhood-a study of 155 patients.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in the gene ATP1A3 have recently been identified to be prevalent in patients with alternating hemiplegia of childhood (AHC2). Based on a large series of patients with AHC, we set out to identify the spectrum of different mutations within the ATP1A3 gene and further establish any correlation with phenotype. METHODS: Clinical data from an international cohort of 155 AHC patients (84 females, 71 males; between 3 months and 52 years) were gathered using a specifically formulated questionnaire and analysed relative to the mutational ATP1A3 gene data for each patient. RESULTS: In total, 34 different ATP1A3 mutations were detected in 85 % (132/155) patients, seven of which were novel. In general, mutations were found to cluster into five different regions. The most frequent mutations included: p.Asp801Asn (43 %; 57/132), p.Glu815Lys (16 %; 22/132), and p.Gly947Arg (11 %; 15/132). Of these, p.Glu815Lys was associated with a severe phenotype, with more severe intellectual and motor disability. p.Asp801Asn appeared to confer a milder phenotypic expression, and p.Gly947Arg appeared to correlate with the most favourable prognosis, compared to the other two frequent mutations. Overall, the comparison of the clinical profiles suggested a gradient of severity between the three major mutations with differences in intellectual (p = 0.029) and motor (p = 0.039) disabilities being statistically significant. For patients with epilepsy, age at onset of seizures was earlier for patients with either p.Glu815Lys or p.Gly947Arg mutation, compared to those with p.Asp801Asn mutation (p < 0.001). With regards to the five mutation clusters, some clusters appeared to correlate with certain clinical phenotypes. No statistically significant clinical correlations were found between patients with and without ATP1A3 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results, demonstrate a highly variable clinical phenotype in patients with AHC2 that correlates with certain mutations and possibly clusters within the ATP1A3 gene. Our description of the clinical profile of patients with the most frequent mutations and the clinical picture of those with less common mutations confirms the results from previous studies, and further expands the spectrum of genotype-phenotype correlations. Our results may be useful to confirm diagnosis and may influence decisions to ensure appropriate early medical intervention in patients with AHC. They provide a stronger basis for the constitution of more homogeneous groups to be included in clinical trials

The unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score A multidisciplinary consensus

Objective: We endeavored to develop an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment score (UIATS) model that includes and quantifies key factors involved in clinical decision-making in the management of UIAs and to assess agreement for this model among specialists in UIA management and research. Methods: An international multidisciplinary (neurosurgery, neuroradiology, neurology, clinical epidemiology) group of 69 specialists was convened to develop and validate the UIATS model using a Delphi consensus. For internal (39 panel members involved in identification of relevant features) and external validation (30 independent external reviewers), 30 selected UIA cases were used to analyze agreement with UIATS management recommendations based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 indicating strong agreement). Interrater agreement (IRA) was assessed with standardized coefficients of dispersion (v(r)*) (v(r)* 5 0 indicating excellent agreement and v(r)* = 1 indicating poor agreement). Results: The UIATS accounts for 29 key factors in UIA management. Agreement with UIATS (mean Likert scores) was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.3) per reviewer for both reviewer cohorts; agreement per case was 4.3 (95% CI 4.1-4.4) for panel members and 4.5 (95% CI 4.3-4.6) for external reviewers (p = 0.017). Mean Likert scores were 4.2 (95% CI 4.1-4.3) for interventional reviewers (n = 56) and 4.1 (95% CI 3.9-4.4) for noninterventional reviewers (n = 12) (p = 0.290). Overall IRA (v(r)*) for both cohorts was 0.026 (95% CI 0.019-0.033). Conclusions: This novel UIA decision guidance study captures an excellent consensus among highly informed individuals on UIA management, irrespective of their underlying specialty. Clinicians can use the UIATS as a comprehensive mechanism for indicating how a large group of specialists might manage an individual patient with a UIA.Peer reviewe

Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme identifies chemicals, drugs, mixtures, occupational exposures, lifestyles and personal habits, and physical and biological agents that cause cancer in humans and has evaluated about 1000 agents since 1971. Monographs are written by ad hoc Working Groups (WGs) of international scientific experts over a period of about 12 months ending in an eight-day meeting. The WG evaluates all of the publicly available scientific information on each substance and, through a transparent and rigorous process,1 decides on the degree to which the scientific evidence supports that substance's potential to cause or not cause cancer in humans. For Monograph 112,2 17 expert scientists evaluated the carcinogenic hazard for four insecticides and the herbicide glyphosate.3 The WG concluded that the data for glyphosate meet the criteria for classification as a probable human carcinogen. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the primary agency of the European Union for risk assessments regarding food safety. In October 2015, EFSA reported4 on their evaluation of the Renewal Assessment Report5 (RAR) for glyphosate that was prepared by the Rapporteur Member State, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR). EFSA concluded that ?glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential?. Addendum 1 (the BfR Addendum) of the RAR5 discusses the scientific rationale for differing from the IARC WG conclusion. Serious flaws in the scientific evaluation in the RAR incorrectly characterise the potential for a carcinogenic hazard from exposure to glyphosate. Since the RAR is the basis for the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) conclusion,4 it is critical that these shortcomings are corrected

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Funder: laura and john arnold foundationBACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care

A novel approach of homozygous haplotype sharing identifies candidate genes in autism spectrum disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a highly heritable disorder of complex and heterogeneous aetiology. It is primarily characterized by altered cognitive ability including impaired language and communication skills and fundamental deficits in social reciprocity. Despite some notable successes in neuropsychiatric genetics, overall, the high heritability of ASD (~90%) remains poorly explained by common genetic risk variants. However, recent studies suggest that rare genomic variation, in particular copy number variation, may account for a significant proportion of the genetic basis of ASD. We present a large scale analysis to identify candidate genes which may contain low-frequency recessive variation contributing to ASD while taking into account the potential contribution of population differences to the genetic heterogeneity of ASD. Our strategy, homozygous haplotype (HH) mapping, aims to detect homozygous segments of identical haplotype structure that are shared at a higher frequency amongst ASD patients compared to parental controls. The analysis was performed on 1,402 Autism Genome Project trios genotyped for 1 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We identified 25 known and 1,218 novel ASD candidate genes in the discovery analysis including CADM2, ABHD14A, CHRFAM7A, GRIK2, GRM3, EPHA3, FGF10, KCND2, PDZK1, IMMP2L and FOXP2. Furthermore, 10 of the previously reported ASD genes and 300 of the novel candidates identified in the discovery analysis were replicated in an independent sample of 1,182 trios. Our results demonstrate that regions of HH are significantly enriched for previously reported ASD candidate genes and the observed association is independent of gene size (odds ratio 2.10). Our findings highlight the applicability of HH mapping in complex disorders such as ASD and offer an alternative approach to the analysis of genome-wide association data