Microfluidic liquid sheets as large-area targets for high repetition XFELs

The high intensity of X-ray free electron lasers (XFELs) can damage solution-phase samples on every scale, ranging from the molecular or electronic structure of a sample to the macroscopic structure of a liquid microjet. By using a large surface area liquid sheet microjet as a sample target instead of a standard cylindrical microjet, the incident X-ray spot size can be increased such that the incident intensity falls below the damage threshold. This capability is becoming particularly important for high repetition rate XFELs, where destroying a target with each pulse would require prohibitively large volumes of sample. We present here a study of microfluidic liquid sheet dimensions as a function of liquid flow rate. Sheet lengths, widths and thickness gradients are shown for three styles of nozzles fabricated from isotropically etched glass. In-vacuum operation and sample recirculation using these nozzles is demonstrated. The effects of intense XFEL pulses on the structure of a liquid sheet are also briefly examined

DataSheet1_Microfluidic liquid sheets as large-area targets for high repetition XFELs.PDF

The high intensity of X-ray free electron lasers (XFELs) can damage solution-phase samples on every scale, ranging from the molecular or electronic structure of a sample to the macroscopic structure of a liquid microjet. By using a large surface area liquid sheet microjet as a sample target instead of a standard cylindrical microjet, the incident X-ray spot size can be increased such that the incident intensity falls below the damage threshold. This capability is becoming particularly important for high repetition rate XFELs, where destroying a target with each pulse would require prohibitively large volumes of sample. We present here a study of microfluidic liquid sheet dimensions as a function of liquid flow rate. Sheet lengths, widths and thickness gradients are shown for three styles of nozzles fabricated from isotropically etched glass. In-vacuum operation and sample recirculation using these nozzles is demonstrated. The effects of intense XFEL pulses on the structure of a liquid sheet are also briefly examined.</p

IRF2BPL is associated with neurological phenotypes

Interferon regulatory factor 2 binding protein-like (IRF2BPL) encodes a member of the IRF2BP family of transcriptional regulators. Currently the biological function of this gene is obscure, and the gene has not been associated with a Mendelian disease. Here we describe seven individuals who carry damaging heterozygous variants in IRF2BPL and are affected with neurological symptoms. Five individuals who carry IRF2BPL nonsense variants resulting in a premature stop codon display severe neurodevelopmental regression, hypotonia, progressive ataxia, seizures, and a lack of coordination. Two additional individuals, both with missense variants, display global developmental delay and seizures and a relatively milder phenotype than those with nonsense alleles. The IRF2BPL bioinformatics signature based on population genomics is consistent with a gene that is intolerant to variation. We show that the fruit-fly IRF2BPL ortholog, called pits (protein interacting with Ttk69 and Sin3A), is broadly detected, including in the nervous system. Complete loss of pits is lethal early in development, whereas partial knockdown with RNA interference in neurons leads to neurodegeneration, revealing a requirement for this gene in proper neuronal function and maintenance. The identified IRF2BPL nonsense variants behave as severe loss-of-function alleles in this model organism, and ectopic expression of the missense variants leads to a range of phenotypes. Taken together, our results show that IRF2BPL and pits are required in the nervous system in humans and flies, and their loss leads to a range of neurological phenotypes in both species

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health