CRISPR/Cas9 editing in human pluripotent stem cell-cardiomyocytes highlights arrhythmias, hypocontractility, and energy depletion as potential therapeutic targets for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Aims: Sarcomeric gene mutations frequently underlie hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a prevalent and complex condition leading to left ventricle thickening and heart dysfunction. We evaluated isogenic genome-edited human pluripotent stem cell-cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CM) for their validity to model, and add clarity to, HCM. Methods and results: CRISPR/Cas9 editing produced 11 variants of the HCM-causing mutation c.C9123T-MYH7 [(p.R453C-?-myosin heavy chain (MHC)] in 3 independent hPSC lines. Isogenic sets were differentiated to hPSC-CMs for high-throughput, non-subjective molecular and functional assessment using 12 approaches in 2D monolayers and/or 3D engineered heart tissues. Although immature, edited hPSC-CMs exhibited the main hallmarks of HCM (hypertrophy, multi-nucleation, hypertrophic marker expression, sarcomeric disarray). Functional evaluation supported the energy depletion model due to higher metabolic respiration activity, accompanied by abnormalities in calcium handling, arrhythmias, and contraction force. Partial phenotypic rescue was achieved with ranolazine but not omecamtiv mecarbil, while RNAseq highlighted potentially novel molecular targets. Conclusion: Our holistic and comprehensive approach showed that energy depletion affected core cardiomyocyte functionality. The engineered R453C-?MHC-mutation triggered compensatory responses in hPSC-CMs, causing increased ATP production and ?MHC to energy-efficient ?MHC switching. We showed that pharmacological rescue of arrhythmias was possible, while MHY7: MYH6 and mutant: wild-type MYH7 ratios may be diagnostic, and previously undescribed lncRNAs and gene modifiers are suggestive of new mechanisms

Using behavioural science in Public Health settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experience of public health practitioners and behavioural scientists

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of COVID-19 and the importance of behaviour change to limit its spread created an urgent need to apply behavioural science to public health. Knowledge mobilisation, the processes whereby research leads to useful findings that are implemented to affect positive outcomes, is a goal for researchers, policy makers and practitioners alike. This study aimed to explores the experience of using behavioural science in public health during COVID-19, to discover barriers and facilitators and whether the rapidly changing context of COVID-19 influenced knowledge mobilisation. METHODS: We conducted a semi-structured interview study, with ten behavioural scientists and seven public health professionals in England, Scotland, Wales, The Netherlands and Canada. We conducted an inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We report three key themes and 10 sub-themes: 1.Challenges and facilitators of translation of behavioural science into public health (Methods and frameworks supported translation, Lack of supportive infrastructure, Conviction and sourcing of evidence and Embracing behavioural science) 2. The unique context of translation (Rapid change in context, the multi-disciplinary team and the emotional toll). 3. Recommendations to support future behavioural science translation (Embedding experts into teams, Importance of a collaborative network and showcasing the role of behavioural science). DISCUSSION: Barriers and facilitators included factors related to relationships between people, such as networks and teams; the expertise of individual people; and those related to materials, such as the use of frameworks and an overwhelming amount of evidence and literature. CONCLUSION: People and frameworks were seen as important in facilitating behavioural science in practice. Future research could explore how different frameworks are used. We recommend a stepped competency framework for behavioural science in public health and more focus on nurturing networks to facilitate knowledge mobilisation in future emergencies

Budget impact of endovascular treatment for acute ischaemic stroke patients in the Netherlands for 2015–2021

Introduction: Endovascular treatment (EVT) has been proven to be both effective and cost-effective for patients with acute ischaemic stroke. We investigated the budget impact of large-scale implementation of EVT for acute ischaemic stroke patients in the Netherlands for 2015–2021. Methods: An analysis was performed from a healthcare perspective as a preplanned substudy of the Multicenter Randomized Clinical trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN). Estimated yearly costs during follow-up after stroke for patients who had or had not been treated with EVT as add-on to usual care were linked to numbers of new patients retrieved from 2 Dutch registries of EVT that started after the last inclusion in MR CLEAN (2014). Aggregated costs and costs per care sector were calculated based on prevalence using a population dynamic tool. Results: From 2015, the yearly number of new acute ischaemic stroke patients receiving EVT increased almost threefold, from 812 in 2015 to 2,370 in 2021. The introduction of EVT plus usual care resulted in estimated net annual savings that increased from € 2.9 million in 2015 to € 58 million in 2021. Conclusion: Offering EVT as add-on to usual care for acute ischaemic stroke patients was increasingly cost saving from a national healthcare perspective but affected distinct healthcare sectors differently

Economic Evaluation of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose: Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke has been proven clinically effective, but evidence of the cost-effectiveness based on real-world data is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess whether endovascular therapy plus usual care is cost-effective in comparison to usual care alone in acute ischemic stroke patients. Methods: An economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective with a 2-year time horizon. Empirical data on health outcomes and the use of resources following endovascular treatment were gathered parallel to the MR CLEAN trial (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) and its 2-year follow-up study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as the extra costs per additional patient with functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score 0-2) and the extra cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Results: The mean costs per patient in the intervention group were $126 494 versus$143 331 in the control group (mean difference, -$16 839 [95$38 113 to $5456]). Compared with patients in the control group, more patients in the intervention group achieved functional independence, 37.2$18 233 saved per extra patient with a good outcome and $105 869 saved per additional quality-adjusted life year. Conclusions: Endovascular treatment added to usual care is clinically effective, and cost saving in comparison to usual care alone in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Registration: URL: https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/695; Unique identifier: NL695. URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758

Two-year clinical follow-up of the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in The Netherlands (MR CLEAN): design and statistical analysis plan of the extended follow-up study

Background: MR CLEAN was the first randomized trial to demonstrate the short-term clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. Several other trials confirmed that endovascular treatment improves clinical outcome at three months. However, limited data are available on long-term clinical outcome. We aimed to estimate the effect of endovascular treatment on functional outcome at two-year follow-up in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Secondly, we aimed to assess the effect of endovascular treatment on major vascular events and mortality during two years of follow-up. Methods: MR CLEAN is a multicenter clinical trial with randomized treatment allocation, open-label treatment, and blinded endpoint evaluation. Patients included were 18 years or older with acute ischemic stroke caused by a proven anterior proximal artery occlusion who could be treated within six hours after stroke onset. The intervention contrast was endovascular treatment and usual care versus no endovascular treatment and usual care. The current study extended the follow-up duration from three months to two years. The primary outcome is the score on the modified Rankin scale at two years. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality and the occurrence of major vascular events within two years of follow-up. Discussion: The results of our study provide information on the long-term clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment, which may have implications for individual treatment decisions and estimates of cost-effectiveness. Trial registration:NTR1804. Registered on 7 May 2009; ISRCTN10888758. Registered on 24 July 2012 (main MR CLEAN trial); NTR5073. Registered on 26 February 2015 (extended follow-up study)