Dissociation of tau pathology and neuronal hypometabolism within the ATN framework of Alzheimer’s disease

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is defined by amyloid (A) and tau (T) pathologies, with T better correlated to neurodegeneration (N). However, T and N have complex regional relationships in part related to non-AD factors that influence N. With machine learning, we assessed heterogeneity in 18F-flortaucipir vs. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as markers of T and neuronal hypometabolism (NM) in 289 symptomatic patients from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. We identified six T/NM clusters with differing limbic and cortical patterns. The canonical group was defined as the T/NM pattern with lowest regression residuals. Groups resilient to T had less hypometabolism than expected relative to T and displayed better cognition than the canonical group. Groups susceptible to T had more hypometabolism than expected given T and exhibited worse cognitive decline, with imaging and clinical measures concordant with non-AD copathologies. Together, T/NM mismatch reveals distinct imaging signatures with pathobiological and prognostic implications for AD

Search for CP Violation in the Decay Z -> b (b bar) g

About three million hadronic decays of the Z collected by ALEPH in the years 1991-1994 are used to search for anomalous CP violation beyond the Standard Model in the decay Z -> b \bar{b} g. The study is performed by analyzing angular correlations between the two quarks and the gluon in three-jet events and by measuring the differential two-jet rate. No signal of CP violation is found. For the combinations of anomalous CP violating couplings, ${\hat{h}}_b = {\hat{h}}_{Ab}g_{Vb}-{\hat{h}}_{Vb}g_{Ab}$ and $h^{\ast}_b = \sqrt{\hat{h}_{Vb}^{2}+\hat{h}_{Ab}^{2}}$, limits of \hat{h}_b < 0.59$and$h^{\ast}_{b} < 3.02$ are given at 95\% CL.Comment: 8 pages, 1 postscript figure, uses here.sty, epsfig.st

Toward a General Theory of Standards of Proof

Which standard of proof is best for a particular type of case This deceptively simple question has been much discussed but the current state of understanding is unsatisfactory Statisticians posed a general answer philosophers and others launched an assault on that answer practically oriented scholars draw on both strains unsystematically and courts generally offer little or no reasoning for their decisions The goal of this article is to outline a systematic and complete justification for selecting one probabilistic standard of proof over another By training a microscope on one small corner of the law incapacity will contests this article demonstrates the relevance of old factors identifies several new factors and integrates the factors into an approach that will hopefully guide future inquiry One important implication is that the choice of proof standard will almost necessarily be tentative too much is unknown or unknowabl

Common genetic variants in the CLDN2 and PRSS1-PRSS2 loci alter risk for alcohol-related and sporadic pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is a complex, progressively destructive inflammatory disorder. Alcohol was long thought to be the primary causative agent, but genetic contributions have been of interest since the discovery that rare PRSS1, CFTR, and SPINK1 variants were associated with pancreatitis risk. We now report two significant genome-wide associations identified and replicated at PRSS1-PRSS2 (1×10-12) and x-linked CLDN2 (p < 1×10-21) through a two-stage genome-wide study (Stage 1, 676 cases and 4507 controls; Stage 2, 910 cases and 4170 controls). The PRSS1 variant affects susceptibility by altering expression of the primary trypsinogen gene. The CLDN2 risk allele is associated with atypical localization of claudin-2 in pancreatic acinar cells. The homozygous (or hemizygous male) CLDN2 genotype confers the greatest risk, and its alleles interact with alcohol consumption to amplify risk. These results could partially explain the high frequency of alcohol-related pancreatitis in men – male hemizygous frequency is 0.26, female homozygote is 0.07

Oral Abstracts 7: RA ClinicalO37. Long-Term Outcomes of Early RA Patients Initiated with Adalimumab Plus Methotrexate Compared with Methotrexate Alone Following a Targeted Treatment Approach

Background: This analysis assessed, on a group level, whether there is a long-term advantage for early RA patients treated with adalimumab (ADA) + MTX vs those initially treated with placebo (PBO) + MTX who either responded to therapy or added ADA following inadequate response (IR). Methods: OPTIMA was a 78- week, randomized, controlled trial of ADA + MTX vs PBO + MTX in MTX-naïve early (<1 year) RA patients. Therapy was adjusted at week 26: ADA + MTX-responders (R) who achieved DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 at weeks 22 and 26 (Period 1, P1) were re-randomized to withdraw or continue ADA and PBO + MTX-R continued randomized therapy for 52 weeks (P2); IR-patients received open-label (OL) ADA + MTX during P2. This post hoc analysis evaluated the proportion of patients at week 78 with DAS28 (CRP) <3.2, HAQ-DI <0.5, and/or ΔmTSS ≤0.5 by initial treatment. To account for patients who withdrew ADA during P2, an equivalent proportion of R was imputed from ADA + MTX-R patients. Results: At week 26, significantly more patients had low disease activity, normal function, and/or no radiographic progression with ADA + MTX vs PBO + MTX (Table 1). Differences in clinical and functional outcomes disappeared following additional treatment, when PBO + MTX-IR (n = 348/460) switched to OL ADA + MTX. Addition of OL ADA slowed radiographic progression, but more patients who received ADA + MTX from baseline had no radiographic progression at week 78 than patients who received initial PBO + MTX. Conclusions: Early RA patients treated with PBO + MTX achieved comparable long-term clinical and functional outcomes on a group level as those who began ADA + MTX, but only when therapy was optimized by the addition of ADA in PBO + MTX-IR. Still, ADA + MTX therapy conferred a radiographic benefit although the difference did not appear to translate to an additional functional benefit. Disclosures: P.E., AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer, UCB, Roche, BMS—Provided Expert Advice, Undertaken Trials, AbbVie—AbbVie sponsored the study, contributed to its design, and participated in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, and in the writing, reviewing, and approval of the final version. R.F., AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Roche, UCB, Celgene, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. S.F., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. A.K., AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. H.K., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. S.R., AbbVie—Employee, Stocks. J.S., AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Pfizer (Wyeth), MSD (Schering-Plough), Novo-Nordisk, Roche, Sandoz, UCB—Research Grants, Consultation Fees. R.V., AbbVie, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Human Genome Sciences, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma—Consultation Fees, Research Support. Table 1.Week 78 clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes in patients who received continued ADA + MTX vs those who continued PBO + MTX or added open-label ADA following an inadequate response ADA + MTX, n/N (%)a PBO + MTX, n/N (%)b Outcome Week 26 Week 52 Week 78 Week 26 Week 52 Week 78 DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 246/466 (53) 304/465 (65) 303/465 (65) 139/460 (30)*** 284/460 (62) 300/460 (65) HAQ-DI <0.5 211/466 (45) 220/466 (47) 224/466 (48) 150/460 (33)*** 203/460 (44) 208/460 (45) ΔmTSS ≤0.5 402/462 (87) 379/445 (86) 382/443 (86) 330/459 (72)*** 318/440 (72)*** 318/440 (72)*** DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 + ΔmTSS ≤0.5 216/462 (47) 260/443 (59) 266/443 (60) 112/459 (24)*** 196/440 (45) 211/440 (48)*** DAS28 (CRP) <3.2 + HAQ-DI <0.5 + ΔmTSS ≤0.5 146/462 (32) 168/443 (38) 174/443 (39) 82/459 (18)*** 120/440 (27)*** 135/440 (31)** aIncludes patients from the ADA Continuation (n = 105) and OL ADA Carry On (n = 259) arms, as well as the proportional equivalent number of responders from the ADA Withdrawal arm (n = 102). bIncludes patients from the MTX Continuation (n = 112) and Rescue ADA (n = 348) arms. Last observation carried forward: DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI; Multiple imputations: ΔmTSS. ***P < 0.001 and **iP < 0.01, respectively, for differences between initial treatments from chi-squar

Production of excited beauty states in Z decays

A data sample of about 3.0 million hadronic Z decays collected by the ALEPH experiment at LEP in the years 1991 through 1994, is used to make an inclusive selection of B~hadron events. In this event sample 4227 \pm 140 \pm 252 B^* mesons in the decay B^* \to B \gamma and 1944 \pm 108 \pm 161 B^{**} mesons decaying into a B~meson and a charged pion are reconstructed. For the well established B^* meson the following quantities areobtained: \Delta M = M_{B^*} - M_{B} = (45.30\pm 0.35\pm 0.87)~\mathrm{MeV}/c^2 and N_{B^*}/(N_B+N_{B^*}) = (77.1 \pm 2.6 \pm 7.0)\%. The angular distribution of the photons in the B^* rest frame is used to measure the relative contribution of longitudinal B^* polarization states to be \sigma_L/(\sigma_L + \sigma_T)= (33 \pm 6 \pm 5)\%. \\ Resonance structure in the M(B\pi)-M(B) mass difference is observed at (424 \pm 4 \pm 10)~\mathrm{MeV}/c^2. Its shape and position is in agreement with the expectation for B^{**}_{u,d} states decaying into B_{u,d}^{(*)} \pi^\pm. The signal is therefore interpreted as arising from them. The relative production rate is determined to be \frac{BR(Z \to b \to B_{u,d}^{**})}{BR(Z \to b \to B_{u,d})} = [27.9 \pm 1.6(stat) \pm 5.9(syst) \phantom{a}^{+3.9}_{-5.6}(model)]\%. where the third error reflects the uncertainty due to different production and decay models for the broad B_{u,d}^{**} states