Neuroimaging findings in neurodevelopmental copy number variants: identifying molecular pathways to convergent phenotypes

Genomic copy number variants (CNVs) are associated with a high risk of neurodevelopmental disorders. A growing body of genetic studies suggests that these high-risk genetic variants converge in common molecular pathways, and that common pathways also exist across clinically distinct disorders, such as schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. A key question is how common molecular mechanisms converge into similar clinical outcomes. We review emerging evidence for convergent cognitive and brain phenotypes across distinct CNVs. Multiple CNVs were shown to have similar effects on core sensory, cognitive and motor traits. Emerging data from multi-site neuroimaging studies have provided valuable information on how these CNVs affect brain structure and function. However, most of these studies examined one CNV at a time, making it difficult to fully understand the proportion of shared brain effects. Recent studies have started to combine neuroimaging data from multiple CNV carriers and identified similar brain effects across CNVs. Some early findings also support convergence in CNV animal models. Systems biology, through integration of multi-level data, provides new insights into convergent molecular mechanisms across genetic risk variants (e.g., altered synaptic activity). However, the link between such key molecular mechanisms and convergent psychiatric phenotypes is still unknown. In order to better understand this link, we need new approaches that integrate human molecular data with neuroimaging, cognitive, and animal models data, while taking into account critical developmental timepoints. Identifying risk mechanisms across genetic loci can elucidate the pathophysiology of neurodevelopmental disorders and identify new therapeutic targets for cross-disorder applications

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions 1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process 2. In April 2020, an influential paper 3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

Beyond the Global Brain Differences:Intraindividual Variability Differences in 1q21.1 Distal and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 Deletion Carriers

BACKGROUND: Carriers of the 1q21.1 distal and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants exhibit regional and globalbrain differences compared with noncarriers. However, interpreting regional differences is challenging if a globaldifference drives the regional brain differences. Intraindividual variability measures can be used to test for regionaldifferences beyond global differences in brain structure.METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging data were used to obtain regional brain values for 1q21.1 distal deletion (n =30) and duplication (n = 27) and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 deletion (n = 170) and duplication (n = 243) carriers and matchednoncarriers (n = 2350). Regional intra-deviation scores, i.e., the standardized difference between an individual’sregional difference and global difference, were used to test for regional differences that diverge from the globaldifference.RESULTS: For the 1q21.1 distal deletion carriers, cortical surface area for regions in the medial visual cortex, posterior cingulate, and temporal pole differed less and regions in the prefrontal and superior temporal cortex differedmore than the global difference in cortical surface area. For the 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 deletion carriers, cortical thicknessin regions in the medial visual cortex, auditory cortex, and temporal pole differed less and the prefrontal andsomatosensory cortex differed more than the global difference in cortical thickness.CONCLUSIONS: We find evidence for regional effects beyond differences in global brain measures in 1q21.1 distaland 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants. The results provide new insight into brain profiling of the 1q21.1 distaland 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants, with the potential to increase understanding of the mechanismsinvolved in altered neurodevelopment

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

DATA AVAILABILITY : All data and study material are provided either in the Supplementary information or through the two online repositories (OSF and Tableau Public, both accessible via https://psyarxiv.com/58udn). No code was used for analyses in this work.Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process. In April 2020, an influential paper proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.The National Science Foundation; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education); Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education); the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation | Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development); National Science Foundation grants; the European Research Council; the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.http://www.nature.com/naturehj2024Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS)Non

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

Neuroimaging Findings in Neurodevelopmental Copy Number Variants: Identifying Molecular Pathways to Convergent Phenotypes

Genomic copy number variants (CNVs) are associated with a high risk of neurodevelopmental disorders. A growing body of genetic studies suggests that these high-risk genetic variants converge in common molecular pathways and that common pathways also exist across clinically distinct disorders, such as schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. A key question is how common molecular mechanisms converge into similar clinical outcomes. We review emerging evidence for convergent cognitive and brain phenotypes across distinct CNVs. Multiple CNVs were shown to have similar effects on core sensory, cognitive, and motor traits. Emerging data from multisite neuroimaging studies have provided valuable information on how these CNVs affect brain structure and function. However, most of these studies examined one CNV at a time, making it difficult to fully understand the proportion of shared brain effects. Recent studies have started to combine neuroimaging data from multiple CNV carriers and identified similar brain effects across CNVs. Some early findings also support convergence in CNV animal models. Systems biology, through integration of multilevel data, provides new insights into convergent molecular mechanisms across genetic risk variants (e.g., altered synaptic activity). However, the link between such key molecular mechanisms and convergent psychiatric phenotypes is still unknown. To better understand this link, we need new approaches that integrate human molecular data with neuroimaging, cognitive, and animal model data, while taking into account critical developmental time points. Identifying risk mechanisms across genetic loci can elucidate the pathophysiology of neurodevelopmental disorders and identify new therapeutic targets for cross-disorder applications

Prediction of Response to Cisplatin-Based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Patients by Molecular Subtyping including KRT and FGFR Target Gene Assessment

Patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma achieving pathological complete response (pCR) upon neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have improved prognosis. Molecular subtypes of bladder cancer differ markedly regarding sensitivity to cisplatin-based chemotherapy and harbor FGFR treatment targets to various content. The objective of the present study was to evaluate whether preoperative assessment of molecular subtype as well as FGFR target gene expression is predictive for therapeutic outcome—rate of ypT0 status—to justify subsequent prospective validation within the “BladderBRIDGister”. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens from transurethral bladder tumor resections (TUR) prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and corresponding radical cystectomy samples after chemotherapy of 36 patients were retrospectively collected. RNA from FFPE tissues were extracted by commercial kits, Relative gene expression of subtyping markers (e.g., KRT5, KRT20) and target genes (FGFR1, FGFR3) was analyzed by standardized RT-qPCR systems (STRATIFYER Molecular Pathology GmbH, Cologne). Spearman correlation, Kruskal–Wallis, Mann–Whitney and sensitivity/specificity tests were performed by JMP 9.0.0 (SAS software). The neoadjuvant cohort consisted of 36 patients (median age: 69, male 83% vs. female 17%) with 92% of patients being node-negative during radical cystectomy after 1 to 4 cycles of NAC. When comparing pretreatment with post-treatment samples, the median expression of KRT20 dropped most significantly from DCT 37.38 to 30.65, which compares with a 128-fold decrease. The reduction in gene expression was modest for other luminal marker genes (GATA3 6.8-fold, ERBB2 6.3-fold). In contrast, FGFR1 mRNA expression increased from 33.28 to 35.88 (~6.8-fold increase). Spearman correlation revealed positive association of pretreatment KRT20 mRNA levels with achieving pCR (r = 0.3072: p = 0.0684), whereas pretreatment FGFR1 mRNA was associated with resistance to chemotherapy (r = −0.6418: p < 0.0001). Hierarchical clustering identified luminal tumors of high KRT20 mRNA expression being associated with high pCR rate (10/16; 63%), while the double-negative subgroup with high FGFR1 expression did not respond with pCR (0/9; 0%). Molecular subtyping distinguishes patients with high probability of response from tumors as resistant to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Targeting FGFR1 in less-differentiated bladder cancer subgroups may sensitize tumors for adopted treatments or subsequent chemotherapy

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

The latency reversing agent HODHBt synergizes with IL-15 to enhance cytotoxic function of HIV-specific CD8+ T-cells

IL-15 is under clinical investigation towards the goal of curing HIV infection, due to its abilities to reverse HIV latency and enhance immune effector function. However, increased potency through combination with other agents may be needed. 3-hydroxy-1,2,3-benzotriazin-4(3H)-one (HODHBt) enhances IL-15-mediated latency reversal and NK function, by increasing STAT5 activation. We hypothesized that HODHBt would also synergize with IL-15, via STAT5, to directly enhance HIV-specific cytotoxic T-cell responses. We show that ex vivo IL-15+HODHBt treatment markedly enhances HIV-specific granzyme B-releasing T-cell responses in PBMCs from ARV-suppressed donors. We also observed upregulation of antigen processing and presentation in CD4+ T-cells, and increased surface MHC-I. In ex vivo PBMCs, IL-15+HODHBt was sufficient to reduce intact proviruses in 1 of 3 ARV-suppressed donors. Our findings reveal the potential for 2nd-generation IL-15 studies incorporating HODHBt-like therapeutics. Iterative studies layering on additional latency reversal or other agents are needed to achieve consistent ex vivo reservoir reductions