Antibodies to the endoplasmic reticulum-resident chaperones calnexin, BiP and Grp94 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus

Objectives. To investigate the presence of autoantibodies against mammalian chaperones of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) in patients with RA and other immune-mediated diseases. Methods. Sera from healthy donors, from early RA patients with two follow-up samples, patients with SLE, SSc and IBD were collected and analysed for anti-ER chaperone antibodies. Detection of serum IgG antibodies against immunoglobulin heavy chain binding protein (BiP), glucose-regulated protein 94 (Grp94) and calnexin was carried out using ELISA. The specificity of sera positive for individual ER chaperones was confirmed by immunoblotting. Statistical analysis was performed using Welch's t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, partial correlation and Pearson's correlation. Results. In patients with RA and SLE, autoantibody titres against BiP, Grp94 and calnexin were significantly higher than those in healthy controls. These autoantibodies were detectable in patients with early RA and titres remained stable for at least 6-12 months. Also several SSc and IBD patients exhibited autoantibodies against these ER chaperones; however, titres and frequencies were lower than in RA or SLE patients. Furthermore, anti-calnexin antibodies correlated significantly with the presence of BiP and Grp94 autoantibodies in patients with RA and SLE. Conclusion. Calnexin and Grp94 were identified as novel autoantigens in RA and calnexin in SLE. Since calnexin, Grp94 and BiP are ER-resident proteins of eukaryotic cells, our data suggest that autoantibody generation against ER chaperones is independent of initial exposure to the corresponding bacterial chaperones; rather, ER chaperones may represent genuine autoantigen

Differential impact of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks and impact on relapse:a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: There is an urgent need to better understand and prevent relapse in major depressive disorder (MDD). We explored the differential impact of various MDD relapse prevention strategies (pharmacological and/or psychological) on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks in a randomised setting, and their predictive value for relapse. Methods: We did a secondary analysis using experience sampling methodology (ESM) data from individuals with remitted recurrent depression that was collected alongside a randomised controlled trial that ran in the Netherlands, comparing: (I) tapering antidepressants while receiving preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), (II) combining antidepressants with PCT, or (III) continuing antidepressants without PCT, for the prevention of depressive relapse, as well as ESM data from 11 healthy controls. Participants had multiple past depressive episodes, but were remitted for at least 8 weeks and on antidepressants for at least six months. Exclusion criteria were: current (hypo)mania, current alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety disorder that required treatment, psychological treatment more than twice per month, a diagnosis of organic brain damage, or a history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Fluctuations (within-person variance, root mean square of successive differences, autocorrelation) in negative and positive affect were calculated. Changes in individual affect networks during treatment were modelled using time-varying vector autoregression, both with and without applying regularisation. We explored whether affect fluctuations or changes in affect networks over time differed between treatment conditions or relapse outcomes, and predicted relapse during 2-year follow-up. This ESM study was registered at ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN15472145. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 72 study participants were recruited, 42 of whom were included in the analyses. We found no indication that affect fluctuations differed between treatment groups, nor that they predicted relapse. We observed large individual differences in affect network structure across participants (irrespective of treatment or relapse status) and in healthy controls. We found no indication of group-level differences in how much networks changed over time, nor that changes in networks over time predicted time to relapse (regularised models: hazard ratios [HR] 1063, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.65; non-regularised models: HR 2.54, 95% CI 0.23–28.7, p = 0.45) or occurrence of relapse (regularised models: odds ratios [OR] 22.84, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.90; non-regularised models: OR 7.57, 95% CI 0.07–3709.54, p = 0.44) during complete follow-up. Interpretation: Our findings should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of this study and wide confidence intervals. While group-level differences in affect dynamics cannot be ruled out due to low statistical power, visual inspection of individual affect networks also revealed no meaningful patterns in relation to MDD relapse. More studies are needed to assess whether affect dynamics as informed by ESM may predict relapse or guide personalisation of MDD relapse prevention in daily practice. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Research Council, University of Amsterdam.</p

Differential impact of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks and impact on relapse:a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: There is an urgent need to better understand and prevent relapse in major depressive disorder (MDD). We explored the differential impact of various MDD relapse prevention strategies (pharmacological and/or psychological) on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks in a randomised setting, and their predictive value for relapse. Methods: We did a secondary analysis using experience sampling methodology (ESM) data from individuals with remitted recurrent depression that was collected alongside a randomised controlled trial that ran in the Netherlands, comparing: (I) tapering antidepressants while receiving preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), (II) combining antidepressants with PCT, or (III) continuing antidepressants without PCT, for the prevention of depressive relapse, as well as ESM data from 11 healthy controls. Participants had multiple past depressive episodes, but were remitted for at least 8 weeks and on antidepressants for at least six months. Exclusion criteria were: current (hypo)mania, current alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety disorder that required treatment, psychological treatment more than twice per month, a diagnosis of organic brain damage, or a history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Fluctuations (within-person variance, root mean square of successive differences, autocorrelation) in negative and positive affect were calculated. Changes in individual affect networks during treatment were modelled using time-varying vector autoregression, both with and without applying regularisation. We explored whether affect fluctuations or changes in affect networks over time differed between treatment conditions or relapse outcomes, and predicted relapse during 2-year follow-up. This ESM study was registered at ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN15472145. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 72 study participants were recruited, 42 of whom were included in the analyses. We found no indication that affect fluctuations differed between treatment groups, nor that they predicted relapse. We observed large individual differences in affect network structure across participants (irrespective of treatment or relapse status) and in healthy controls. We found no indication of group-level differences in how much networks changed over time, nor that changes in networks over time predicted time to relapse (regularised models: hazard ratios [HR] 1063, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.65; non-regularised models: HR 2.54, 95% CI 0.23–28.7, p = 0.45) or occurrence of relapse (regularised models: odds ratios [OR] 22.84, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.90; non-regularised models: OR 7.57, 95% CI 0.07–3709.54, p = 0.44) during complete follow-up. Interpretation: Our findings should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of this study and wide confidence intervals. While group-level differences in affect dynamics cannot be ruled out due to low statistical power, visual inspection of individual affect networks also revealed no meaningful patterns in relation to MDD relapse. More studies are needed to assess whether affect dynamics as informed by ESM may predict relapse or guide personalisation of MDD relapse prevention in daily practice. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Research Council, University of Amsterdam.</p

Differential impact of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks and impact on relapse:a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: There is an urgent need to better understand and prevent relapse in major depressive disorder (MDD). We explored the differential impact of various MDD relapse prevention strategies (pharmacological and/or psychological) on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks in a randomised setting, and their predictive value for relapse. Methods: We did a secondary analysis using experience sampling methodology (ESM) data from individuals with remitted recurrent depression that was collected alongside a randomised controlled trial that ran in the Netherlands, comparing: (I) tapering antidepressants while receiving preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), (II) combining antidepressants with PCT, or (III) continuing antidepressants without PCT, for the prevention of depressive relapse, as well as ESM data from 11 healthy controls. Participants had multiple past depressive episodes, but were remitted for at least 8 weeks and on antidepressants for at least six months. Exclusion criteria were: current (hypo)mania, current alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety disorder that required treatment, psychological treatment more than twice per month, a diagnosis of organic brain damage, or a history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Fluctuations (within-person variance, root mean square of successive differences, autocorrelation) in negative and positive affect were calculated. Changes in individual affect networks during treatment were modelled using time-varying vector autoregression, both with and without applying regularisation. We explored whether affect fluctuations or changes in affect networks over time differed between treatment conditions or relapse outcomes, and predicted relapse during 2-year follow-up. This ESM study was registered at ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN15472145. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 72 study participants were recruited, 42 of whom were included in the analyses. We found no indication that affect fluctuations differed between treatment groups, nor that they predicted relapse. We observed large individual differences in affect network structure across participants (irrespective of treatment or relapse status) and in healthy controls. We found no indication of group-level differences in how much networks changed over time, nor that changes in networks over time predicted time to relapse (regularised models: hazard ratios [HR] 1063, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.65; non-regularised models: HR 2.54, 95% CI 0.23–28.7, p = 0.45) or occurrence of relapse (regularised models: odds ratios [OR] 22.84, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.90; non-regularised models: OR 7.57, 95% CI 0.07–3709.54, p = 0.44) during complete follow-up. Interpretation: Our findings should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of this study and wide confidence intervals. While group-level differences in affect dynamics cannot be ruled out due to low statistical power, visual inspection of individual affect networks also revealed no meaningful patterns in relation to MDD relapse. More studies are needed to assess whether affect dynamics as informed by ESM may predict relapse or guide personalisation of MDD relapse prevention in daily practice. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Research Council, University of Amsterdam.</p

Differential impact of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks and impact on relapse:a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: There is an urgent need to better understand and prevent relapse in major depressive disorder (MDD). We explored the differential impact of various MDD relapse prevention strategies (pharmacological and/or psychological) on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks in a randomised setting, and their predictive value for relapse. Methods: We did a secondary analysis using experience sampling methodology (ESM) data from individuals with remitted recurrent depression that was collected alongside a randomised controlled trial that ran in the Netherlands, comparing: (I) tapering antidepressants while receiving preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), (II) combining antidepressants with PCT, or (III) continuing antidepressants without PCT, for the prevention of depressive relapse, as well as ESM data from 11 healthy controls. Participants had multiple past depressive episodes, but were remitted for at least 8 weeks and on antidepressants for at least six months. Exclusion criteria were: current (hypo)mania, current alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety disorder that required treatment, psychological treatment more than twice per month, a diagnosis of organic brain damage, or a history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Fluctuations (within-person variance, root mean square of successive differences, autocorrelation) in negative and positive affect were calculated. Changes in individual affect networks during treatment were modelled using time-varying vector autoregression, both with and without applying regularisation. We explored whether affect fluctuations or changes in affect networks over time differed between treatment conditions or relapse outcomes, and predicted relapse during 2-year follow-up. This ESM study was registered at ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN15472145. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 72 study participants were recruited, 42 of whom were included in the analyses. We found no indication that affect fluctuations differed between treatment groups, nor that they predicted relapse. We observed large individual differences in affect network structure across participants (irrespective of treatment or relapse status) and in healthy controls. We found no indication of group-level differences in how much networks changed over time, nor that changes in networks over time predicted time to relapse (regularised models: hazard ratios [HR] 1063, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.65; non-regularised models: HR 2.54, 95% CI 0.23–28.7, p = 0.45) or occurrence of relapse (regularised models: odds ratios [OR] 22.84, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.90; non-regularised models: OR 7.57, 95% CI 0.07–3709.54, p = 0.44) during complete follow-up. Interpretation: Our findings should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of this study and wide confidence intervals. While group-level differences in affect dynamics cannot be ruled out due to low statistical power, visual inspection of individual affect networks also revealed no meaningful patterns in relation to MDD relapse. More studies are needed to assess whether affect dynamics as informed by ESM may predict relapse or guide personalisation of MDD relapse prevention in daily practice. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Research Council, University of Amsterdam.</p

Differential impact of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks and impact on relapse:a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: There is an urgent need to better understand and prevent relapse in major depressive disorder (MDD). We explored the differential impact of various MDD relapse prevention strategies (pharmacological and/or psychological) on affect fluctuations and individual affect networks in a randomised setting, and their predictive value for relapse. Methods: We did a secondary analysis using experience sampling methodology (ESM) data from individuals with remitted recurrent depression that was collected alongside a randomised controlled trial that ran in the Netherlands, comparing: (I) tapering antidepressants while receiving preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), (II) combining antidepressants with PCT, or (III) continuing antidepressants without PCT, for the prevention of depressive relapse, as well as ESM data from 11 healthy controls. Participants had multiple past depressive episodes, but were remitted for at least 8 weeks and on antidepressants for at least six months. Exclusion criteria were: current (hypo)mania, current alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety disorder that required treatment, psychological treatment more than twice per month, a diagnosis of organic brain damage, or a history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Fluctuations (within-person variance, root mean square of successive differences, autocorrelation) in negative and positive affect were calculated. Changes in individual affect networks during treatment were modelled using time-varying vector autoregression, both with and without applying regularisation. We explored whether affect fluctuations or changes in affect networks over time differed between treatment conditions or relapse outcomes, and predicted relapse during 2-year follow-up. This ESM study was registered at ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN15472145. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 72 study participants were recruited, 42 of whom were included in the analyses. We found no indication that affect fluctuations differed between treatment groups, nor that they predicted relapse. We observed large individual differences in affect network structure across participants (irrespective of treatment or relapse status) and in healthy controls. We found no indication of group-level differences in how much networks changed over time, nor that changes in networks over time predicted time to relapse (regularised models: hazard ratios [HR] 1063, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.65; non-regularised models: HR 2.54, 95% CI 0.23–28.7, p = 0.45) or occurrence of relapse (regularised models: odds ratios [OR] 22.84, 95% CI &lt;0.0001–&gt;10 000, p = 0.90; non-regularised models: OR 7.57, 95% CI 0.07–3709.54, p = 0.44) during complete follow-up. Interpretation: Our findings should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of this study and wide confidence intervals. While group-level differences in affect dynamics cannot be ruled out due to low statistical power, visual inspection of individual affect networks also revealed no meaningful patterns in relation to MDD relapse. More studies are needed to assess whether affect dynamics as informed by ESM may predict relapse or guide personalisation of MDD relapse prevention in daily practice. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Research Council, University of Amsterdam.</p

Small but crucial : the novel small heat shock protein Hsp21 mediates stress adaptation and virulence in Candida albicans

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Cmr1/WDR76 defines a nuclear genotoxic stress body linking genome integrity and protein quality control

DNA replication stress is a source of genomic instability. Here we identify ​changed mutation rate 1 (​Cmr1) as a factor involved in the response to DNA replication stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and show that ​Cmr1—together with ​Mrc1/​Claspin, ​Pph3, the chaperonin containing ​TCP1 (CCT) and 25 other proteins—define a novel intranuclear quality control compartment (INQ) that sequesters misfolded, ubiquitylated and sumoylated proteins in response to genotoxic stress. The diversity of proteins that localize to INQ indicates that other biological processes such as cell cycle progression, chromatin and mitotic spindle organization may also be regulated through INQ. Similar to ​Cmr1, its human orthologue ​WDR76 responds to proteasome inhibition and DNA damage by relocalizing to nuclear foci and physically associating with CCT, suggesting an evolutionarily conserved biological function. We propose that ​Cmr1/​WDR76 plays a role in the recovery from genotoxic stress through regulation of the turnover of sumoylated and phosphorylated proteins

Kondo quasiparticle dynamics observed by resonant inelastic x-ray scattering

Effective models focused on pertinent low-energy degrees of freedom have substantially contributed to our qualitative understanding of quantum materials. An iconic example, the Kondo model, was key to demonstrating that the rich phase diagrams of correlated metals originate from the interplay of localized and itinerant electrons. Modern electronic structure calculations suggest that to achieve quantitative material-specific models, accurate consideration of the crystal field and spin-orbit interactions is imperative. This poses the question of how local high-energy degrees of freedom become incorporated into a collective electronic state. Here, we use resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) on CePd$_3$ to clarify the fate of all relevant energy scales. We find that even spin-orbit excited states acquire pronounced momentum-dependence at low temperature - the telltale sign of hybridization with the underlying metallic state. Our results demonstrate how localized electronic degrees of freedom endow correlated metals with new properties, which is critical for a microscopic understanding of superconducting, electronic nematic, and topological states