Dorsolateral medullary ischemic infarction causing autonomic dysfunction and headache: a case report

Stroke can present, among other signs, with headache. Here, we describe the case of a man suffering from severe orbitary pain and autonomic dysfunction secondary to dorsolateral medullary ischemia. The anatomical relationship between lesion and symptomatology could be an indirect sign of hypothalamospinal tract involvement in the genesis of autonomic dysfunction and headache resembling a trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia

New criteria to identify risk of progression in monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance and smoldering multiple myeloma based on multiparameter flow cytometry analysis of bone marrow plasma cells

[EN] Monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) are plasma cell disorders with a risk of progression of approximately 1% and 10% per year, respectively. We have previously shown that the proportion of bone marrow (BM) aberrant plasma cells (aPCs) within the BMPC compartment (aPC/BMPC) as assessed by flow cytometry (FC) contributes to differential diagnosis between MGUS and multiple myloma (MM). The goal of the present study was to investigate this parameter as a marker for risk of progression in MGUS (n = 407) and SMM (n = 93). Patients with a marked predominance of aPCs/BMPC (> or = 95%) at diagnosis displayed a significantly higher risk of progression both in MGUS and SMM (P or = 95%) as the most important independent variable, together with DNA aneuploidy and immunoparesis, for MGUS and SMM, respectively. Using these independent variables, we have identified 3 risk categories in MGUS (PFS at 5 years of 2%, 10%, and 46%, respectively; P< .001) and SMM patients (PFS at 5 years of 4%, 46%, and 72%, respectively; P < .001). Our results show that multiparameter FC evaluation of BMPC at diagnosis is a valuable tool that could help to individualize the follow-up strategy for MGUS and SMM patients

The Maristán stigma scale: a standardized international measure of the stigma of schizophrenia and other psychoses

Background: People with schizophrenia face prejudice and discrimination from a number of sources including professionals and families. The degree of stigma perceived and experienced varies across cultures and communities. We aimed to develop a cross-cultural measure of the stigma perceived by people with schizophrenia.Method: Items for the scale were developed from qualitative group interviews with people with schizophrenia in six countries. The scale was then applied in face-to-face interviews with 164 participants, 103 of which were repeated after 30 days. Principal Axis Factoring and Promax rotation evaluated the structure of the scale; Horn’s parallel combined with bootstrapping determined the number of factors; and intra-class correlation assessed test-retest reliability.Results: The final scale has 31 items and four factors: informal social networks, socio-institutional, health professionals and self-stigma. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.84 for the Factor 1; 0.81 for Factor 2; 0.74 for Factor 3, and 0.75 for Factor 4. Correlation matrix among factors revealed that most were in the moderate range [0.31-0.49], with the strongest occurring between perception of stigma in the informal network and self-stigma and there was also a weaker correlation between stigma from health professionals and self-stigma. Test-retest reliability was highest for informal networks [ICC 0.76 [0.67 -0.83]] and self-stigma [ICC 0.74 [0.64-0.81]]. There were no significant differences in the scoring due to sex or age. Service users in Argentina had the highest scores in almost all dimensions.Conclusions: The MARISTAN stigma scale is a reliable measure of the stigma of schizophrenia and related psychoses across several cultures. A confirmatory factor analysis is needed to assess the stability of its factor structure.We are also grateful for support from the Pan-American Health Office (PAHO), Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust and University College London (UCL)

The LARGE Principle of Cellular Reprogramming: Lost, Acquired and Retained Gene Expression in Foreskin and Amniotic Fluid-Derived Human iPS Cells

Human amniotic fluid cells (AFCs) are routinely obtained for prenatal diagnostics procedures. Recently, it has been illustrated that these cells may also serve as a valuable model system to study developmental processes and for application in regenerative therapies. Cellular reprogramming is a means of assigning greater value to primary AFCs by inducing self-renewal and pluripotency and, thus, bypassing senescence. Here, we report the generation and characterization of human amniotic fluid-derived induced pluripotent stem cells (AFiPSCs) and demonstrate their ability to differentiate into the trophoblast lineage after stimulation with BMP2/BMP4. We further carried out comparative transcriptome analyses of primary human AFCs, AFiPSCs, fibroblast-derived iPSCs (FiPSCs) and embryonic stem cells (ESCs). This revealed that the expression of key senescence-associated genes are down-regulated upon the induction of pluripotency in primary AFCs (AFiPSCs). By defining distinct and overlapping gene expression patterns and deriving the LARGE (Lost, Acquired and Retained Gene Expression) Principle of Cellular Reprogramming, we could further highlight that AFiPSCs, FiPSCs and ESCs share a core self-renewal gene regulatory network driven by OCT4, SOX2 and NANOG. Nevertheless, these cell types are marked by distinct gene expression signatures. For example, expression of the transcription factors, SIX6, EGR2, PKNOX2, HOXD4, HOXD10, DLX5 and RAXL1, known to regulate developmental processes, are retained in AFiPSCs and FiPSCs. Surprisingly, expression of the self-renewal-associated gene PRDM14 or the developmental processes-regulating genes WNT3A and GSC are restricted to ESCs. Implications of this, with respect to the stability of the undifferentiated state and long-term differentiation potential of iPSCs, warrant further studies

From consultation toward co-production in science and policy: A critical systematic review of participatory climate and energy initiatives

In recent decades, co-production has become a cornerstone both in science and policy-making, motivating further collaboration between different actors. To scrutinize such participatory processes within the climate and energy fields, we conducted a critical systematic review of 183 records, which includes scientific publications, but also other initiatives coming from the public administration or the non-profit sector. First, we unpack six aspects of co-production: (1) the different levels of participation; (2) the emerging topics and issues; (3) the scale and location at which initiatives are conducted; (4) the actors who take part in the processes; (5) the different methods and tools for participation and (6) the outcomes and transformational potential of the initiatives. Our results show that real co-production is still far from being mainstream, with consultation still accounting for a majority of initiatives. Themes remain focused on the mitigation sphere, a tendency related to a majority of the records happening in developed countries. However, we also observe new categories of actors challenging traditional decision-making, as well as emerging methods and tools opening the space for more social innovation and participation. Following, in our critical analysis, we argue that there is a crucial need for a better interconnection between science and policy (especially at national and international scales) and that a reflection on transformation is fundamental when planning any participatory initiative. We finally claim that, despite not being a silver bullet, meaningful citizen participation constitutes a viable alternative to tackle today's complex problems. © 2020The PARIS REINFORCE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 820846. We would like to acknowledge Mikel Gonz?lez, Dirk van de Ven and Jorge Moreno from the Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3) and the PARIS REINFORCE consortium. The PARIS REINFORCE project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 820846