Large Dog Relinquishment to Two Municipal Facilities in New York City and Washington, D.C.: Identifying Targets for Intervention

While the overall trend in euthanasia has been decreasing nationally, large dogs are at a higher risk of euthanasia than other sized dogs in most animal shelters in the United States. We hypothesized one way to increase the lives saved with respect to these large dogs is to keep them home when possible. In order to develop solutions to decrease relinquishment, a survey was developed to learn more about the reasons owners relinquish large dogs. The survey was administered to owners relinquishing their dogs at two large municipal facilities, one in New York City and one in Washington, D.C. There were 157 responses between the two facilities. We found both significant similarities and differences between respondents and their dogs from the two cities. We identified opportunities to potentially support future relinquishers and found that targets for interventions are likely different in each community

Opportunities and Challenges to Emergency Department-Based HIV Testing Services and Self-Testing Programs: A Qualitative Study of Healthcare Providers and Patients in Kenya

BACKGROUND: Young people in Sub-Saharan Africa, especially males, have been insufficiently engaged through HIV Testing Services (HTS). In Kenya, younger persons are often treated in emergency departments (EDs) for injuries, an interaction where HTS and HIV self-testing (HIVST) can be leveraged. Data from stakeholders on ED-HTS and HIVST is lacking and needed to understand opportunities and barriers for HIV testing and care, and inform program implementation. METHODS: Between December 2021 and March 2022, 32 in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with 16 male and 16 female patients who had been treated in the Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH) ED, half of whom had been HIV-tested. Six focus-group discussions (FGDs) were also conducted with 50 nurses, doctors, HIV testing counselors, and administrators working in the ED. All transcripts were double-coded and thematically analyzed using Dedoose software and a parallel inductive and deductive coding approach which allowed for capture of both a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: Patients and providers agreed that ED-HTS are facilitated by friendly staff, patient education, high perceived HIV risk, and confidentiality. However, ED-HTS is limited by burdens on staff, resources, time, and space, as well as severity of patient injuries limiting ability to consent to or prioritize HIV testing. These limitations provide opportunities for ED-HIVST: particularly the ability to test at a comfortable time and place, especially when provided alongside sufficient HIV and testing education, contact with healthcare providers, and psychosocial support. Barriers for ED-HIVST where identified and as patients’ concerns about HIVST accuracy and mental health impacts of a positive test, as well providers’ identified barriers on their concerns for loss to follow up and inability to complete confirmatory testing. COM-B Model [Figure: see text] Application of the COM-B Model of Behavior Change to ED-HIVST Acceptability in Kenya CONCLUSION: ED stakeholders are receptive to HTS and HIVST, and patients desire the opportunity to use HIVST. Potential challenges—such as psychological effects of testing positive, worries about access to follow-up care, and confusion about how to self-administer testing, may be addressed through programming designed to promote education, access and ensure follow-up mechanisms. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures

Evaluating knowledge to support climate action: A framework for sustained assessment. report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment.

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2019. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Weather Climate and Society 11(3), (2019):465-487, doi: 10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1.As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal “climate assessment consortium” to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.This report would not have been possible without the support and participation of numerous organizations and individuals. We thank New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo for announcing in his 2018 State of the State agenda that the IAC would be reconvened. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (Contract ID 123416), Columbia University’s Earth Institute, and the American Meteorological Society provided essential financial support and much more, including sage advice and moral support from John O’Leary, Shara Mohtadi, Steve Cohen, Alex Halliday, Peter deMenocal, Keith Seitter, Paul Higgins, and Bill Hooke. We thank the attendees of a workshop, generously funded by the Kresge Foundation in November of 2017, that laid a foundation for the idea to establish a civil-society-based assessment consortium. During the course of preparing the report, IAC members consulted with individuals too numerous to list here—state, local, and tribal officials; researchers; experts in nongovernmental and community-based organizations; and professionals in engineering, architecture, public health, adaptation, and other areas. We are so grateful for their time and expertise. We thank the members and staff of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program for providing individual comments on preliminary recommendations during several discussions in open sessions of their meetings. The following individuals provided detailed comments on an earlier version of this report, which greatly sharpened our thinking and recommendations: John Balbus, Tom Dietz, Phil Duffy, Baruch Fischhoff, Brenda Hoppe, Melissa Kenney, Linda Mearns, Claudia Nierenberg, Kathleen Segerson, Soroosh Sorooshian, Chris Weaver, and Brian Zuckerman. Mary Black provided insightful copy editing of several versions of the report. We also thank four anonymous reviewers for their effort and care in critiquing and improving the report. It is the dedication, thoughtful feedback, expertise, care, and commitment of all these people and more that not only made this report possible, but allow us all to continue to support smart and insightful actions in a changing climate. We are grateful as authors and as global citizens. Author contributions: RM, SA, KB, MB, AC, JD, PF, KJ, AJ, KK, JK, ML, JM, RP, TR, LS, JS, JW, and DZ were members of the IAC and shared in researching, discussing, drafting, and approving the report. BA, JF, AG, LJ, SJ, PK, RK, AM, RM, JN, WS, JS, PT, GY, and RZ contributed to specific sections of the report.2020-05-2

Framework for sustained climate assessment in the United States

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2019. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 100(5), (2019): 897-908, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0130.1.As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal “climate assessment consortium” to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.This report would not have been possible without the support and participation of numerous organizations and individuals. We thank New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo for announcing in his 2018 State of the State agenda that the IAC would be reconvened. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (Contract ID 123416), Columbia University’s Earth Institute, and the American Meteorological Society provided essential financial support and much more, including sage advice and moral support from John O’Leary, Shara Mohtadi, Steve Cohen, Alex Halliday, Peter deMenocal, Keith Seitter, Paul Higgins, and Bill Hooke. We thank the attendees of a workshop, generously funded by the Kresge Foundation in November of 2017, that laid a foundation for the idea to establish a civil-society-based assessment consortium. During the course of preparing the report, IAC members consulted with individuals too numerous to list here—state, local, and tribal officials; researchers; experts in nongovernmental and community-based organizations; and professionals in engineering, architecture, public health, adaptation, and other areas. We are so grateful for their time and expertise. We thank the members and staff of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program for providing individual comments on preliminary recommendations during several discussions in open sessions of their meetings. The following individuals provided detailed comments on an earlier version of this report, which greatly sharpened our thinking and recommendations: John Balbus, Tom Dietz, Phil Duffy, Baruch Fischhoff, Brenda Hoppe, Melissa Kenney, Linda Mearns, Claudia Nierenberg, Kathleen Segerson, Soroosh Sorooshian, Chris Weaver, and Brian Zuckerman. Mary Black provided insightful copy editing of several versions of the report. We also thank four anonymous reviewers for their effort and care in critiquing and improving the report. It is the dedication, thoughtful feedback, expertise, care, and commitment of all these people and more that not only made this report possible, but allow us all to continue to support smart and insightful actions in a changing climate. We are grateful as authors and as global citizens. Author contributions: RM, SA, KB, MB, AC, JD, PF, KJ, AJ, KK, JK, ML, JM, RP, TR, LS, JS, JW, and DZ were members of the IAC and shared in researching, discussing, drafting, and approving the report. BA, JF, AG, LJ, SJ, PK, RK, AM, RM, JN, WS, JS, PT, GY, and RZ contributed to specific sections of the report

Targeting DNA Damage Response and Replication Stress in Pancreatic Cancer

Background and aims: Continuing recalcitrance to therapy cements pancreatic cancer (PC) as the most lethal malignancy, which is set to become the second leading cause of cancer death in our society. The study aim was to investigate the association between DNA damage response (DDR), replication stress and novel therapeutic response in PC to develop a biomarker driven therapeutic strategy targeting DDR and replication stress in PC. Methods: We interrogated the transcriptome, genome, proteome and functional characteristics of 61 novel PC patient-derived cell lines to define novel therapeutic strategies targeting DDR and replication stress. Validation was done in patient derived xenografts and human PC organoids. Results: Patient-derived cell lines faithfully recapitulate the epithelial component of pancreatic tumors including previously described molecular subtypes. Biomarkers of DDR deficiency, including a novel signature of homologous recombination deficiency, co-segregates with response to platinum (P < 0.001) and PARP inhibitor therapy (P < 0.001) in vitro and in vivo. We generated a novel signature of replication stress with which predicts response to ATR (P < 0.018) and WEE1 inhibitor (P < 0.029) treatment in both cell lines and human PC organoids. Replication stress was enriched in the squamous subtype of PC (P < 0.001) but not associated with DDR deficiency. Conclusions: Replication stress and DDR deficiency are independent of each other, creating opportunities for therapy in DDR proficient PC, and post-platinum therapy

Retrospective evaluation of whole exome and genome mutation calls in 746 cancer samples

Funder: NCI U24CA211006Abstract: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) curated consensus somatic mutation calls using whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS), respectively. Here, as part of the ICGC/TCGA Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium, which aggregated whole genome sequencing data from 2,658 cancers across 38 tumour types, we compare WES and WGS side-by-side from 746 TCGA samples, finding that ~80% of mutations overlap in covered exonic regions. We estimate that low variant allele fraction (VAF < 15%) and clonal heterogeneity contribute up to 68% of private WGS mutations and 71% of private WES mutations. We observe that ~30% of private WGS mutations trace to mutations identified by a single variant caller in WES consensus efforts. WGS captures both ~50% more variation in exonic regions and un-observed mutations in loci with variable GC-content. Together, our analysis highlights technological divergences between two reproducible somatic variant detection efforts

Evaluation of treatments for separation anxiety in dogs

Objective—To evaluate treatment outcome in dogs with separation anxiety and owner compliance with and perception of effectiveness of discharge instructions. Design—Cohort study. Animals—52 dogs with separation anxiety. Procedure—Sex, age at which the owner obtained the dog, age at which separation anxiety was first noticed, age at behavioral examination, and discharge instructions were obtained from medical records of each dog. Between 6 and 64 months after the behavioral examination, owners were contacted by telephone and questioned about the outcome of treatment, their compliance with discharge instructions, and their perception of the effectiveness of each instruction. Results—Thirty-two (62%) dogs had improved, whereas 20 were the same, were worse, or had been euthanatized or given away. Mixed-breed dogs were significantly less likely to improve than purebred dogs. Compliance varied according to discharge instruction. Significantly fewer dogs with owners that were given \u3e 5 instructions improved or were cured, compared with those with owners given fewer instructions. Twenty-seven dogs were also treated with amitriptyline or other medication; 15 (56%) improved. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Owners complied with instructions that involved little time such as omitting punishment and providing a chew toy at the time of departure. Owners were also willing to increase the dog’s exercise but were not willing to uncouple the cues of departure from real departures or desensitize the dog to impending departure. Administration of psychoactive medication may be necessary to augment behavior modification techniques designed to reduce separation anxiety in dogs. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:342–345

Evaluation of treatments for separation anxiety in dogs

Objective—To evaluate treatment outcome in dogs with separation anxiety and owner compliance with and perception of effectiveness of discharge instructions. Design—Cohort study. Animals—52 dogs with separation anxiety. Procedure—Sex, age at which the owner obtained the dog, age at which separation anxiety was first noticed, age at behavioral examination, and discharge instructions were obtained from medical records of each dog. Between 6 and 64 months after the behavioral examination, owners were contacted by telephone and questioned about the outcome of treatment, their compliance with discharge instructions, and their perception of the effectiveness of each instruction. Results—Thirty-two (62%) dogs had improved, whereas 20 were the same, were worse, or had been euthanatized or given away. Mixed-breed dogs were significantly less likely to improve than purebred dogs. Compliance varied according to discharge instruction. Significantly fewer dogs with owners that were given \u3e 5 instructions improved or were cured, compared with those with owners given fewer instructions. Twenty-seven dogs were also treated with amitriptyline or other medication; 15 (56%) improved. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Owners complied with instructions that involved little time such as omitting punishment and providing a chew toy at the time of departure. Owners were also willing to increase the dog’s exercise but were not willing to uncouple the cues of departure from real departures or desensitize the dog to impending departure. Administration of psychoactive medication may be necessary to augment behavior modification techniques designed to reduce separation anxiety in dogs. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:342–345