Serological assessment of neutrophil elastase activity on elastin during lung ECM remodeling

BACKGROUND: During the pathological destruction of lung tissue, neutrophil elastase (NE) degrades elastin, one of the major constituents of lung parenchyma. However there are no non-invasive methods to quantify NE degradation of elastin. We selected specific elastin fragments generated by NE for antibody generation and developed an ELISA assay (EL-NE) for the quantification of NE-degraded elastin. METHODS: Monoclonal antibodies were developed against 10 NE-specific cleavage sites on elastin. One EL-NE assay was tested for analyte stability, linearity and intra- and inter-assay variation. The NE specificity was demonstrated using elastin cleaved in vitro with matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), cathepsin G (CatG), NE and intact elastin. Clinical relevance was assessed by measuring levels of NE-generated elastin fragments in serum of patients diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF, n = 10) or lung cancer (n = 40). RESULTS: Analyte recovery of EL-NE for human serum was between 85% and 104%, the analyte was stable for four freeze/thaw cycles and after 24 h storage at 4°C. EL-NE was specific for NE-degraded elastin. Levels of NE-generated elastin fragments for elastin incubated in the presence of NE were 900% to 4700% higher than those seen with CatG or MMP incubation or in intact elastin. Serum levels of NE-generated elastin fragments were significantly increased in patients with IPF (137%, p = 0.002) and in patients with lung cancer (510%, p < 0.001) compared with age- and sex-matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: The EL-NE assay was specific for NE-degraded elastin. The EL-NE assay was able to specifically quantify NE-degraded elastin in serum. Serum levels of NE-degraded elastin might be used to detect excessive lung tissue degradation in lung cancer and IPF. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-015-0048-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Scn1b deletion in adult mice results in seizures and SUDEP

Pathogenic lossâ ofâ function variants in SCN1B are linked to Dravet syndrome (DS). Previous work suggested that neuronal pathfinding defects underlie epileptogenesis and SUDEP in the Scn1b null mouse model of DS. We tested this hypothesis by inducing Scn1b deletion in adult mice that had developed normally. Epilepsy and SUDEP, which occur by postnatal day 21 in Scn1b null animals, were observed within 20 days of induced Scn1b deletion in adult mice, suggesting that epileptogenesis in SCN1Bâ DS does not result from defective brain development. Thus, the developmental brain defects observed previously in Scn1b null mice may model other coâ morbidities of DS.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149575/1/acn3785.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149575/2/acn3785_am.pd

Phenotypic Variation and Bistable Switching in Bacteria

Microbial research generally focuses on clonal populations. However, bacterial cells with identical genotypes frequently display different phenotypes under identical conditions. This microbial cell individuality is receiving increasing attention in the literature because of its impact on cellular differentiation, survival under selective conditions, and the interaction of pathogens with their hosts. It is becoming clear that stochasticity in gene expression in conjunction with the architecture of the gene network that underlies the cellular processes can generate phenotypic variation. An important regulatory mechanism is the so-called positive feedback, in which a system reinforces its own response, for instance by stimulating the production of an activator. Bistability is an interesting and relevant phenomenon, in which two distinct subpopulations of cells showing discrete levels of gene expression coexist in a single culture. In this chapter, we address techniques and approaches used to establish phenotypic variation, and relate three well-characterized examples of bistability to the molecular mechanisms that govern these processes, with a focus on positive feedback.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-1 inhibition in patients hospitalised with COVID-19:a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial

This study was funded by an investigator-initiated research grant from Insmed (Bridgewater, NJ, USA). The authors acknowledge the funding and logistical support from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.Background: Neutrophil serine proteases are involved in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and increased serine protease activity has been reported in severe and fatal infection. We investigated whether brensocatib, an inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase-1 (DPP-1; an enzyme responsible for the activation of neutrophil serine proteases), would improve outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Methods: In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial, across 14 hospitals in the UK, patients aged 16 years and older who were hospitalised with COVID-19 and had at least one risk factor for severe disease were randomly assigned 1:1, within 96 h of hospital admission, to once-daily brensocatib 25 mg or placebo orally for 28 days. Patients were randomly assigned via a central web-based randomisation system (TruST). Randomisation was stratified by site and age (65 years or ≥65 years), and within each stratum, blocks were of random sizes of two, four, or six patients. Participants in both groups continued to receive other therapies required to manage their condition. Participants, study staff, and investigators were masked to the study assignment. The primary outcome was the 7-point WHO ordinal scale for clinical status at day 29 after random assignment. The intention-to-treat population included all patients who were randomly assigned and met the enrolment criteria. The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study was registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN30564012. Findings: Between June 5, 2020, and Jan 25, 2021, 406 patients were randomly assigned to brensocatib or placebo; 192 (47·3%) to the brensocatib group and 214 (52·7%) to the placebo group. Two participants were excluded after being randomly assigned in the brensocatib group (214 patients included in the placebo group and 190 included in the brensocatib group in the intention-to-treat population). Primary outcome data was unavailable for six patients (three in the brensocatib group and three in the placebo group). Patients in the brensocatib group had worse clinical status at day 29 after being randomly assigned than those in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·57-0·92]). Prespecified subgroup analyses of the primary outcome supported the primary results. 185 participants reported at least one adverse event; 99 (46%) in the placebo group and 86 (45%) in the brensocatib group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders and infections. One death in the placebo group was judged as possibly related to study drug. Interpretation: Brensocatib treatment did not improve clinical status at day 29 in patients hospitalised with COVID-19.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Geoeconomic variations in epidemiology, ventilation management, and outcomes in invasively ventilated intensive care unit patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pooled analysis of four observational studies

Background: Geoeconomic variations in epidemiology, the practice of ventilation, and outcome in invasively ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remain unexplored. In this analysis we aim to address these gaps using individual patient data of four large observational studies. Methods: In this pooled analysis we harmonised individual patient data from the ERICC, LUNG SAFE, PRoVENT, and PRoVENT-iMiC prospective observational studies, which were conducted from June, 2011, to December, 2018, in 534 ICUs in 54 countries. We used the 2016 World Bank classification to define two geoeconomic regions: middle-income countries (MICs) and high-income countries (HICs). ARDS was defined according to the Berlin criteria. Descriptive statistics were used to compare patients in MICs versus HICs. The primary outcome was the use of low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) for the first 3 days of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were key ventilation parameters (tidal volume size, positive end-expiratory pressure, fraction of inspired oxygen, peak pressure, plateau pressure, driving pressure, and respiratory rate), patient characteristics, the risk for and actual development of acute respiratory distress syndrome after the first day of ventilation, duration of ventilation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality. Findings: Of the 7608 patients included in the original studies, this analysis included 3852 patients without ARDS, of whom 2345 were from MICs and 1507 were from HICs. Patients in MICs were younger, shorter and with a slightly lower body-mass index, more often had diabetes and active cancer, but less often chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart failure than patients from HICs. Sequential organ failure assessment scores were similar in MICs and HICs. Use of LTVV in MICs and HICs was comparable (42\ub74% vs 44\ub72%; absolute difference \u20131\ub769 [\u20139\ub758 to 6\ub711] p=0\ub767; data available in 3174 [82%] of 3852 patients). The median applied positive end expiratory pressure was lower in MICs than in HICs (5 [IQR 5\u20138] vs 6 [5\u20138] cm H2O; p=0\ub70011). ICU mortality was higher in MICs than in HICs (30\ub75% vs 19\ub79%; p=0\ub70004; adjusted effect 16\ub741% [95% CI 9\ub752\u201323\ub752]; p&lt;0\ub70001) and was inversely associated with gross domestic product (adjusted odds ratio for a US$10 000 increase per capita 0\ub780 [95% CI 0\ub775\u20130\ub786]; p&lt;0\ub70001). Interpretation: Despite similar disease severity and ventilation management, ICU mortality in patients without ARDS is higher in MICs than in HICs, with a strong association with country-level economic status. Funding: No funding

Size Doesn't Matter: Towards a More Inclusive Philosophy of Biology

notes: As the primary author, O’Malley drafted the paper, and gathered and analysed data (scientific papers and talks). Conceptual analysis was conducted by both authors.publication-status: Publishedtypes: ArticlePhilosophers of biology, along with everyone else, generally perceive life to fall into two broad categories, the microbes and macrobes, and then pay most of their attention to the latter. ‘Macrobe’ is the word we propose for larger life forms, and we use it as part of an argument for microbial equality. We suggest that taking more notice of microbes – the dominant life form on the planet, both now and throughout evolutionary history – will transform some of the philosophy of biology’s standard ideas on ontology, evolution, taxonomy and biodiversity. We set out a number of recent developments in microbiology – including biofilm formation, chemotaxis, quorum sensing and gene transfer – that highlight microbial capacities for cooperation and communication and break down conventional thinking that microbes are solely or primarily single-celled organisms. These insights also bring new perspectives to the levels of selection debate, as well as to discussions of the evolution and nature of multicellularity, and to neo-Darwinian understandings of evolutionary mechanisms. We show how these revisions lead to further complications for microbial classification and the philosophies of systematics and biodiversity. Incorporating microbial insights into the philosophy of biology will challenge many of its assumptions, but also give greater scope and depth to its investigations

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care1 or hospitalization2–4 after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes—including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)—in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease

Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine