141 research outputs found
Artificial Intelligence for Ovarian Stimulation
Ovarian stimulation, the basis of treatment strategies for infertility, from anovulation to in vitro fertilization, is a highly efficient therapeutic procedure. The stimulation should ensure a complete development of the follicle(s) along with maturation of the oocyte(s), all without risking hyperstimulation and multiple pregnancies. For these reasons, a stimulation protocol should be personalized, and its evolution must be continually scrutinized using measures of both blood hormone levels and ovarian responses by ultrasound. Essentially all of the stimulation algorithms proposed to date focus only on determination of the starting dose of gonadotropin. But ovarian stimulation should be continually monitored until the final decision is made to trigger or to abort the cycle. This decision can be achieved through use of an experience-based computer software system that monitors menstrual cycles through a beginning pregnancy. This software (StimXpertÂź) should work effectively with a classical stimulation as well as a controlled hyperstimulation for IVF. It may also be modified from experience-based to evidence-based programming through progressive learning
To what extent do water reuse treatments reduce antibiotic resistance indicators? A comparison of two full-scale systems
Water reuse is an essential strategy for reducing water demand from conventional sources, alleviating water stress, and promoting sustainability, but understanding the effectiveness of associated treatment processes as barriers to the spread of antibiotic resistance is an important consideration to protecting human health. We comprehensively evaluated the reduction of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) in two field-operational water reuse systems with distinct treatment trains, one producing water for indirect potable reuse (ozone/biologically-active carbon/granular activated carbon) and the other for non-potable reuse (denitrification-filtration/chlorination) using metagenomic sequencing and culture. Relative abundances of total ARGs/clinically-relevant ARGs and cultured ARB were reduced by several logs during primary and secondary stages of wastewater treatment, but to a lesser extent during the tertiary water reuse treatments. In particular, ozonation tended to enrich multi-drug ARGs. The effect of chlorination was facility-dependent, increasing the relative abundance of ARGs when following biologically-active carbon filters, but generally providing a benefit in reduced bacterial numbers and ecological and human health resistome risk scores. Relative abundances of total ARGs and resistome risk scores were lowest in aquifer samples, although resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were occasionally detected in the monitoring well 3-days downgradient from injection, but not 6-months downgradient. Resistant E. coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were occasionally detected in the nonpotable reuse distribution system, along with increased levels of multidrug, sulfonamide, phenicol, and aminoglycoside ARGs. This study illuminates specific vulnerabilities of water reuse systems to persistence, selection, and growth of ARGs and ARB and emphasizes the role of multiple treatment barriers, including aquifers and distribution systems
Atrazine and Breast Cancer: A Framework Assessment of the Toxicological and Epidemiological Evidence
The causal relationship between atrazine exposure and the occurrence of breast cancer in women was evaluated using the framework developed by Adami et al. (2011) wherein biological plausibility and epidemiological evidence were combined to conclude that a causal relationship between atrazine exposure and breast cancer is âunlikelyâ. Carcinogenicity studies in female Sprague-Dawley (SD) but not Fischer-344 rats indicate that high doses of atrazine caused a decreased latency and an increased incidence of combined adenocarcinoma and fibroadenoma mammary tumors. There were no effects of atrazine on any other tumor type in male or female SD or Fischer-344 rats or in three strains of mice. Seven key events that precede tumor expression in female SD rats were identified. Atrazine induces mammary tumors in aging female SD rats by suppressing the luteinizing hormone surge, thereby supporting a state of persistent estrus and prolonged exposure to endogenous estrogen and prolactin. This endocrine mode of action has low biological plausibility for women because women who undergo reproductive senescence have low rather than elevated levels of estrogen and prolactin. Four alternative modes of action (genotoxicity, estrogenicity, upregulation of aromatase gene expression or delayed mammary gland development) were considered and none could account for the tumor response in SD rats. Epidemiological studies provide no support for a causal relationship between atrazine exposure and breast cancer. This conclusion is consistent with International Agency for Research on Cancerâs classification of atrazine as âunclassifiable as to carcinogenicityâ and the United States Environmental Protection Agency's classification of atrazine as ânot likely to be carcinogenic.
Comprehensive characterization of cell-free tumor DNA in plasma and urine of patients with renal tumors.
BACKGROUND:Cell-free tumor-derived DNA (ctDNA) allows non-invasive monitoring of cancers, but its utility in renal cell cancer (RCC) has not been established. METHODS:Here, a combination of untargeted and targeted sequencing methods, applied to two independent cohorts of patients (nâ=â91) with various renal tumor subtypes, were used to determine ctDNA content in plasma and urine. RESULTS:Our data revealed lower plasma ctDNA levels in RCC relative to other cancers of similar size and stage, with untargeted detection in 27.5% of patients from both cohorts. A sensitive personalized approach, applied to plasma and urine from select patients (nâ=â22) improved detection to ~â50%, including in patients with early-stage disease and even benign lesions. Detection in plasma, but not urine, was more frequent amongst patients with larger tumors and in those patients with venous tumor thrombus. With data from one extensively characterized patient, we observed that plasma and, for the first time, urine ctDNA may better represent tumor heterogeneity than a single tissue biopsy. Furthermore, in a subset of patients (nâ=â16), longitudinal sampling revealed that ctDNA can track disease course and may pre-empt radiological identification of minimal residual disease or disease progression on systemic therapy. Additional datasets will be required to validate these findings. CONCLUSIONS:These data highlight RCC as a ctDNA-low malignancy. The biological reasons for this are yet to be determined. Nonetheless, our findings indicate potential clinical utility in the management of patients with renal tumors, provided improvement in isolation and detection approaches
Comprehensive characterization of cell-free tumor DNA in plasma and urine of patients with renal tumors
A Four-Way Comparison of Cardiac Function with Normobaric Normoxia, Normobaric Hypoxia, Hypobaric Hypoxia and Genuine High Altitude.
There has been considerable debate as to whether different modalities of simulated hypoxia induce similar cardiac responses.This was a prospective observational study of 14 healthy subjects aged 22-35 years. Echocardiography was performed at rest and at 15 and 120 minutes following two hours exercise under normobaric normoxia (NN) and under similar PiO2 following genuine high altitude (GHA) at 3,375m, normobaric hypoxia (NH) and hypobaric hypoxia (HH) to simulate the equivalent hypoxic stimulus to GHA.All 14 subjects completed the experiment at GHA, 11 at NN, 12 under NH, and 6 under HH. The four groups were similar in age, sex and baseline demographics. At baseline rest right ventricular (RV) systolic pressure (RVSP, p = 0.0002), pulmonary vascular resistance (p = 0.0002) and acute mountain sickness (AMS) scores were higher and the SpO2 lower (p<0.0001) among all three hypoxic groups (GHA, NH and HH) compared with NN. At both 15 minutes and 120 minutes post exercise, AMS scores, Cardiac output, septal S', lateral S', tricuspid S' and A' velocities and RVSP were higher and SpO2 lower with all forms of hypoxia compared with NN. On post-test analysis, among the three hypoxia groups, SpO2 was lower at baseline and 15 minutes post exercise with GHA (89.3±3.4% and 89.3±2.2%) and HH (89.0±3.1 and (89.8±5.0) compared with NH (92.9±1.7 and 93.6±2.5%). The RV Myocardial Performance (Tei) Index and RVSP were significantly higher with HH than NH at 15 and 120 minutes post exercise respectively and tricuspid A' was higher with GHA compared with NH at 15 minutes post exercise.GHA, NH and HH produce similar cardiac adaptations over short duration rest despite lower SpO2 levels with GHA and HH compared with NH. Notable differences emerge following exercise in SpO2, RVSP and RV cardiac function
Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities
Aim: Comprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW). Location: Global. Taxon: All extant mammal species. Methods: Range maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species). Results: Range maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use. Main conclusion: Expert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control.Fil: Marsh, Charles J.. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Sica, Yanina. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Burguin, Connor. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dorman, Wendy A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Anderson, Robert C.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: del Toro Mijares, Isabel. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Vigneron, Jessica G.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Barve, Vijay. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Dombrowik, Victoria L.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Duong, Michelle. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Guralnick, Robert. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Hart, Julie A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Maypole, J. Krish. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: McCall, Kira. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Ranipeta, Ajay. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Schuerkmann, Anna. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Torselli, Michael A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Lacher, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Wilson, Don E.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Abba, Agustin Manuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - La Plata. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores; ArgentinaFil: Aguirre, Luis F.. Universidad Mayor de San SimĂłn; BoliviaFil: Arroyo Cabrales, JoaquĂn. Instituto Nacional de AntropologĂa E Historia, Mexico; MĂ©xicoFil: AstĂșa, Diego. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Baker, Andrew M.. Queensland University of Technology; Australia. Queensland Museum; AustraliaFil: Braulik, Gill. University of St. Andrews; Reino UnidoFil: Braun, Janet K.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Brito, Jorge. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Busher, Peter E.. Boston University; Estados UnidosFil: Burneo, Santiago F.. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: Camacho, M. Alejandra. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: de Almeida Chiquito, Elisandra. Universidade Federal do EspĂrito Santo; BrasilFil: Cook, Joseph A.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: CuĂ©llar Soto, Erika. Sultan Qaboos University; OmĂĄnFil: Davenport, Tim R. B.. Wildlife Conservation Society; TanzaniaFil: Denys, Christiane. MusĂ©um National d'Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Eldridge, Mark D. B.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Fernandez Duque, Eduardo. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Francis, Charles M.. Environment And Climate Change Canada; CanadĂĄFil: Frankham, Greta. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Freitas, Thales. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Friend, J. Anthony. Conservation And Attractions; AustraliaFil: Giannini, Norberto Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico - TucumĂĄn. Unidad Ejecutora Lillo; ArgentinaFil: Gursky-Doyen, Sharon. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: HacklĂ€nder, Klaus. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Hawkins, Melissa. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Helgen, Kristofer M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Heritage, Steven. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Hinckley, Arlo. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Holden, Mary. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Holekamp, Kay E.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Humle, Tatyana. University Of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Ibåñez Ulargui, Carlos. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Jackson, Stephen M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Janecka, Mary. University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown; Estados Unidos. University of Pittsburgh; Estados UnidosFil: Jenkins, Paula. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Juste, Javier. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Leite, Yuri L. R.. Universidade Federal do EspĂrito Santo; BrasilFil: Novaes, Roberto Leonan M.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Lim, Burton K.. Royal Ontario Museum; CanadĂĄFil: Maisels, Fiona G.. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados UnidosFil: Mares, Michael A.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Marsh, Helene. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Mattioli, Stefano. UniversitĂ degli Studi di Siena; ItaliaFil: Morton, F. Blake. University of Hull; Reino UnidoFil: Ojeda, Agustina Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas; ArgentinaFil: Ordóñez Garza, NictĂ©. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Pardiñas, Ulises Francisco J.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Centro Nacional PatagĂłnico. Instituto de Diversidad y EvoluciĂłn Austral; ArgentinaFil: Pavan, Mariana. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Riley, Erin P.. San Diego State University; Estados UnidosFil: Rubenstein, Daniel I.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Ruelas, Dennisse. Museo de Historia Natural, Lima; PerĂșFil: Schai-Braun, StĂ©phanie. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Schank, Cody J.. University of Texas at Austin; Estados UnidosFil: Shenbrot, Georgy. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Solari, Sergio. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Superina, Mariella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Medicina y BiologĂa Experimental de Cuyo; ArgentinaFil: Tsang, Susan. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Van Cakenberghe, Victor. Universiteit Antwerp; BĂ©lgicaFil: Veron, Geraldine. UniversitĂ© Pierre et Marie Curie; FranciaFil: Wallis, Janette. Kasokwa-kityedo Forest Project; UgandaFil: Whittaker, Danielle. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Wells, Rod. Flinders University.; AustraliaFil: Wittemyer, George. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Woinarski, John. Charles Darwin University; AustraliaFil: Upham, Nathan S.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Jetz, Walter. University of Yale; Estados Unido
Recommended from our members
Patient-specific cancer genes contribute to recurrently perturbed pathways and establish therapeutic vulnerabilities in esophageal adenocarcinoma
Abstract: The identification of cancer-promoting genetic alterations is challenging particularly in highly unstable and heterogeneous cancers, such as esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Here we describe a machine learning algorithm to identify cancer genes in individual patients considering all types of damaging alterations simultaneously. Analysing 261 EACs from the OCCAMS Consortium, we discover helper genes that, alongside well-known drivers, promote cancer. We confirm the robustness of our approach in 107 additional EACs. Unlike recurrent alterations of known drivers, these cancer helper genes are rare or patient-specific. However, they converge towards perturbations of well-known cancer processes. Recurrence of the same process perturbations, rather than individual genes, divides EACs into six clusters differing in their molecular and clinical features. Experimentally mimicking the alterations of predicted helper genes in cancer and pre-cancer cells validates their contribution to disease progression, while reverting their alterations reveals EAC acquired dependencies that can be exploited in therapy
Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities
AimComprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW).LocationGlobal.TaxonAll extant mammal species.MethodsRange maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species).ResultsRange maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use.Main conclusionExpert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control
- âŠ