Identification and analysis of hepatitis C virus NS3 helicase inhibitors using nucleic acid binding assays

Typical assays used to discover and analyze small molecules that inhibit the hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3 helicase yield few hits and are often confounded by compound interference. Oligonucleotide binding assays are examined here as an alternative. After comparing fluorescence polarization (FP), homogeneous time-resolved fluorescence (HTRF®; Cisbio) and AlphaScreen® (Perkin Elmer) assays, an FP-based assay was chosen to screen Sigma’s Library of Pharmacologically Active Compounds (LOPAC) for compounds that inhibit NS3-DNA complex formation. Four LOPAC compounds inhibited the FP-based assay: aurintricarboxylic acid (ATA) (IC50 = 1.4 μM), suramin sodium salt (IC50 = 3.6 μM), NF 023 hydrate (IC50 = 6.2 μM) and tyrphostin AG 538 (IC50 = 3.6 μM). All but AG 538 inhibited helicase-catalyzed strand separation, and all but NF 023 inhibited replication of subgenomic HCV replicons. A counterscreen using Escherichia coli single-stranded DNA binding protein (SSB) revealed that none of the new HCV helicase inhibitors were specific for NS3h. However, when the SSB-based assay was used to analyze derivatives of another non-specific helicase inhibitor, the main component of the dye primuline, it revealed that some primuline derivatives (e.g. PubChem CID50930730) are up to 30-fold more specific for HCV NS3h than similarly potent HCV helicase inhibitors.National Institutes of Health [RO1 AI088001]; Research Growth Initiative Award [101X219] from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Research Foundation; National Institutes of Health Molecular Libraries Initiative [U54 HG005031]. Funding for open access charge: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Research Foundation

INSPEX: design and integration of a portable/wearable smart spatial exploration system

The INSPEX H2020 project main objective is to integrate automotive-equivalent spatial exploration and obstacle detection functionalities into a portable/wearable multi-sensor, miniaturised, low power device. The INSPEX system will detect and localise in real-time static and mobile obstacles under various environmental conditions in 3D. Potential applications range from safer human navigation in reduced visibility, small robot/drone obstacle avoidance systems to navigation for the visually/mobility impaired, this latter being the primary use-case considered in the project

Variation in WNT7A is unlikely to be a cause of familial Congenital Talipes Equinovarus

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Genetic factors make an important contribution to the aetiology of congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV), the most common developmental disorder of the lower limb. WNT7A was suggested as a candidate gene for CTEV on the basis of a genome-wide scan for linkage in a large multi-case family. WNT7A is a plausible candidate gene for CTEV as it provides a signal for pattern formation during limb development, and mutation in WNT7A has been reported in a number of limb malformation syndromes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated the role of WNT7A using a family-based linkage approach in our large series of European multi-case CTEV families. Three microsatellite markers were used, of which one (D3S2385) is intragenic, and the other two (D3S2403, D3S1252) are 700 kb 5' to the start and 20 kb from the 3' end of the gene, respectively. Ninety-one CTEV families, comprising 476 individuals of whom 211 were affected, were genotyped. LOD scores using recessive and incomplete-dominant inheritance models, and non-parametric linkage scores, excluded linkage.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No significant evidence for linkage was observed using either parametric or non-parametric models. LOD scores for the parametric models remained strongly negative in the regions between the markers, and in the 0.5 cM intervals outside the marker map. No significant lod scores were obtained when the data were analysed allowing for heterogeneity.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our evidence suggests that the WNT7A gene is unlikely to be a major contributor to the aetiology of familial CTEV.</p

Is exposure to formaldehyde in air causally associated with leukemia?—A hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence analysis

Recent scientific debate has focused on the potential for inhaled formaldehyde to cause lymphohematopoietic cancers, particularly leukemias, in humans. The concern stems from certain epidemiology studies reporting an association, although particulars of endpoints and dosimetry are inconsistent across studies and several other studies show no such effects. Animal studies generally report neither hematotoxicity nor leukemia associated with formaldehyde inhalation, and hematotoxicity studies in humans are inconsistent. Formaldehyde's reactivity has been thought to preclude systemic exposure following inhalation, and its apparent inability to reach and affect the target tissues attacked by known leukemogens has, heretofore, led to skepticism regarding its potential to cause human lymphohematopoietic cancers. Recently, however, potential modes of action for formaldehyde leukemogenesis have been hypothesized, and it has been suggested that formaldehyde be identified as a known human leukemogen. In this article, we apply our hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence (HBWoE) approach to evaluate the large body of evidence regarding formaldehyde and leukemogenesis, attending to how human, animal, and mode-of-action results inform one another. We trace the logic of inference within and across all studies, and articulate how one could account for the suite of available observations under the various proposed hypotheses. Upon comparison of alternative proposals regarding what causal processes may have led to the array of observations as we see them, we conclude that the case fora causal association is weak and strains biological plausibility. Instead, apparent association between formaldehyde inhalation and leukemia in some human studies is better interpreted as due to chance or confounding

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Modelling human choices: MADeM and decision‑making

Research supported by FAPESP 2015/50122-0 and DFG-GRTK 1740/2. RP and AR are also part of the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics FAPESP grant (2013/07699-0). RP is supported by a FAPESP scholarship (2013/25667-8). ACR is partially supported by a CNPq fellowship (grant 306251/2014-0)