Shared striatal activity in decisions to satisfy curiosity and hunger at the risk of electric shocks

Curiosity is often portrayed as a desirable feature of human faculty. However, curiosity may come at a cost that sometimes puts people in a harmful situation. Here, with a set of behavioural and neuroimaging experiments using stimuli that strongly trigger curiosity (e.g., magic tricks), we examined the psychological and neural mechanisms underlying the motivational effect of curiosity. We consistently demonstrated that across different samples, people were indeed willing to gamble, subjecting themselves to physical risks (i.e. electric shocks) in order to satisfy their curiosity for trivial knowledge that carries no apparent instrumental value. Also, this influence of curiosity shares common neural mechanisms with that of extrinsic incentives (i.e. hunger for food). In particular, we showed that acceptance (compared to rejection) of curiosity/incentive-driven gambles was accompanied by enhanced activity in the ventral striatum (when curiosity was elicited), which extended into the dorsal striatum (when participants made a decision)

RGS12 Interacts with the SNARE-binding Region of the Ca v 2.2 Calcium Channel

Activation of GABAB receptors in chick dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons inhibits the Cav2.2 calcium channel in both a voltage-dependent and voltage-independent manner. The voltage-independent inhibition requires activation of a tyrosine kinase that phosphorylates the alpha1 subunit of the channel and thereby recruits RGS12, a member of the "regulator of G protein signaling" (RGS) proteins. Here we report that RGS12 binds to the SNARE-binding or "synprint" region (amino acids 726-985) in loop II-III of the calcium channel alpha1 subunit. A recombinant protein encompassing the N-terminal PTB domain of RGS12 binds to the synprint region in protein overlay and surface plasmon resonance binding assays; this interaction is dependent on tyrosine phosphorylation and yet is within a sequence that differs from the canonical NPXY motif targeted by other PTB domains. In electrophysiological experiments, microinjection of DRG neurons with synprint-derived peptides containing the tyrosine residue Tyr-804 altered the rate of desensitization of neurotransmitter-mediated inhibition of the Cav2.2 calcium channel, whereas peptides centered about a second tyrosine residue, Tyr-815, were without effect. RGS12 from a DRG neuron lysate was precipitated using synprint peptides containing phosphorylated Tyr-804. The high degree of conservation of Tyr-804 in the SNARE-binding region of Cav2.1 and Cav2.2 calcium channels suggests that this region, in addition to the binding of SNARE proteins, is also important for determining the time course of the modulation of calcium current via tyrosine phosphorylation

Impact of a delayed second dose of mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) and inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) on risks of all-cause mortality, emergency department visit, and unscheduled hospitalization

BACKGROUND: Safety after the second dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine remains to be elucidated, especially among individuals reporting adverse events after their first dose. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a delayed second dose on all-cause mortality and emergency services. METHODS: A territory-wide, retrospective cohort of people who had completed two doses of mRNA (BNT162b2) or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 (CoronaVac) vaccine between February 23 and July 3, 2021, in Hong Kong was analyzed, with linkage to electronic health records retrieved from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Vaccine recipients were classified as receiving a second dose within recommended intervals (21-28 days for BNT162b2; 14-28 days for CoronaVac) or delayed. Study outcomes were all-cause mortality, emergency department (ED) visits, and unscheduled hospitalizations within 28 days after the second dose of vaccination. RESULTS: Among 417,497 BNT162b2 and 354,283 CoronaVac second dose recipients, 3.8% and 28.5% received the second dose beyond the recommended intervals (mean 34.4 and 31.8 days), respectively. During the study period, there were < 5 daily new cases of COVID-19 infections in the community. Delaying the second dose was not associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.185, 95% CI 0.478-2.937, P = 0.714), risk of ED visit (HR = 0.966, 95% CI 0.926-1.008, P = 0.113), and risk of unscheduled hospitalization (HR = 0.956, 95% CI 0.878-1.040, P = 0.294) compared to that within the recommended interval for CoronaVac recipients. No statistically significant differences in all-cause mortality (HR = 4.438, 95% CI 0.951-20.701, P = 0.058), ED visit (HR = 1.037, 95% CI 0.951-1.130, P = 0.411), and unscheduled hospitalization (HR = 1.054, 95% CI 0.867-1.281, P = 0.597) were identified between people who received a second dose of BNT162b2 within and beyond the recommended intervals. CONCLUSIONS: No significant association between delayed second dose of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac and all-cause mortality, ED visit, and unscheduled hospitalization was observed in the present cohort. Regardless of the recommended or delayed schedule for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, a second dose of both vaccines should be administered to obtain better protection against infection and serious disease. The second dose should be administered within the recommended interval following the manufacturer's product information, until further studies support the benefits of delaying vaccination outweighing the risks

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection in people aged 60 years or above: a case–control study

BACKGROUND: In view of limited evidence that specifically addresses vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the older population, this study aims to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older adults during the Omicron BA.2 outbreak. METHODS: This case-control study analyzed data available between January and March 2022 from the electronic health databases in Hong Kong and enrolled individuals aged 60 or above. Each case was matched with up to 10 controls by age, sex, index date and Charlson Comorbidity Index for the four outcomes (COVID-19 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalization, severe complications, and all-cause mortality) independently. Conditional logistic regression was conducted to evaluate VE of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against COVID-19-related outcomes within 28 days after COVID-19 infection among participants stratified by age groups (60-79, ≥80 years old). RESULTS: A dose-response relationship between the number of vaccine doses received and protection against severe or fatal disease was observed. Highest VE (95% CI) against COVID-19 infection was observed in individuals aged ≥80 who received three doses of BNT162b2 [75.5% (73.1-77.7%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [53.9% (51.0-56.5%)] compared to those in the younger age group who received three doses of BNT162b2 [51.1% (49.9-52.4%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [2.0% (-0.1-4.1%)]. VE (95% CI) was higher for other outcomes, reaching 91.9% (89.4-93.8%) and 86.7% (84.3-88.8%) against COVID-19-related hospitalization; 85.8% (61.2-94.8%) and 89.8% (72.4-96.3%) against COVID-19-related severe complications; and 96.4% (92.9-98.2%) and 95.0% (92.1-96.8%) against COVID-19-related mortality after three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older vaccine recipients, respectively. A similar dose-response relationship was established in younger vaccine recipients and after stratification by sex and Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: Both BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccination were effective in protecting older adults against COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-related severe outcomes amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and VE increased further with the third dose

Association between the risk of seizure and COVID-19 vaccinations: A self-controlled case-series study

OBJECTIVE: The risk of seizure following BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations has been sparsely investigated. This study aimed to evaluate this association. METHOD: Patients who had their first seizure-related hospitalization between February 23, 2021 and January 31, 2022 were identified in Hong Kong. All seizure episodes happening on the day of vaccination (day 0) were excluded since clinicians validated that most of the cases on day 0 were syncopal episodes. Within-individual comparison using a modified self-controlled case series analysis was applied to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of seizure using conditional Poisson regression. RESULTS: We identified 1656 individuals who had their first seizure-related hospitalization (BNT162b2: 426; CoronaVac: 263; unvaccinated: 967) within the observation period. The incidence of seizure was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.80-1.33) and 1.11 (95% CI: 0.80-1.50) per 100,000 doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac administered respectively. 16 and 17 individuals received second dose after having first seizure within 28 days after first dose of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations, respectively. None had recurrent seizures after the second dose. There was no increased risk during day 1-6 after the first (BNT162b2: IRR=1.39, 95% CI=0.75-2.58; CoronaVac: IRR=1.19, 95% CI=0.50-2.83) and second doses (BNT162b2: IRR=1.36, 95% CI 0.72-2.57; CoronaVac: IRR=0.71, 95% CI=0.22-2.30) of vaccinations. During 7-13, 14-20- and 21-27-days post-vaccination, no association was observed for both vaccines. SIGNIFICANCE: The findings demonstrated no increased risk of seizure following BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations. Future studies will be warranted to evaluate the risk of seizure following COVID-19 vaccinations in different populations with subsequent doses to ensure the generalizability

Comparing hybrid and regular COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity against the Omicron epidemic

Evidence on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among people who recovered from a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is warranted to inform vaccination recommendations. Using the territory-wide public healthcare and vaccination records of over 2.5 million individuals in Hong Kong, we examined the potentially differential risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and mortality between those receiving two homologous doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac versus those with a previous infection receiving only one dose amid the Omicron epidemic. Results show a single dose after a SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a lower risk of infection (BNT162b2: adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.475, 95% CI: 0.410–0.550; CoronaVac: adjusted IRR = 0.397, 95% CI: 0.309–0.511) and no significant difference was detected in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality compared with a two-dose vaccination regimen. Findings support clinical recommendations that those with a previous infection could receive a single dose to gain at least similar protection as those who received two doses without a previous infection

Waning effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe complications, and mortality with two to three doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2: a case-control study

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate waning effectiveness against severe and fatal COVID-19 with 2-3 doses of CoronaVac/BNT162b2, where data is limited. METHODS: A case-control study included individuals aged ≥18 years, unvaccinated or received 2-3 doses of CoronaVac/BNT162b2, using electronic healthcare databases in Hong Kong. Those with first COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe complications, or mortality between 1 January and 15 August 2022 were defined as cases and matched with up-to-10 controls by age, sex, index date, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated at different time intervals from second and third dose vaccination (0-13 up-to 210-240 days) using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities and medications. RESULTS: By 211-240 days after second dose, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalisation reduced to 46.6% (40.7%-51.8%) for BNT162b2 and 36.2% (28.0%-43.4%) for CoronaVac, and VE against COVID-19-related mortality were 73.8% (55.9%-84.4%) and 76.6% (60.8%-86.0%). After third dose, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalisation decreased from 91.2% (89.5%-92.6%) for BNT162b2 and 76.7% (73.7%-79.4%) for CoronaVac at 0-13 days, to 67.1% (60.4%-72.6%) and 51.3% (44.2%-57.5%) at 91-120 days. VE against COVID-19-related mortality for BNT162b2 remained high from 0-13 days [98.2% (95.0%-99.3%)] to 91-120 days [94.6% (77.7%-98.7%)], and for CoronaVac reduced from 0-13 days [96.7% (93.2%-98.4%)] to 91-120 days [86.4% (73.3%-93.1%)]. CONCLUSIONS: Significant risk reduction against COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality after CoronaVac or BNT162b2 vaccination was observed for >240 and >120 days after second and third dose compared to unvaccinated, despite significant waning over time. Timely administration of booster doses could provide higher levels of protection

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against mortality and severe complications after SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection: a case–control study

Data regarding protection against mortality and severe complications after Omicron BA.2 infection with CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccines remains limited. We conducted a case–control study to evaluate the risk of severe complications and mortality following 1–3 doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 using electronic health records database. Cases were adults with their first COVID-19-related mortality or severe complications between 1 January and 31 March 2022, matched with up-to 10 controls by age, sex, index date, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications by type and number of doses was estimated using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities and medications. Vaccine effectiveness (95% CI) against COVID-19-related mortality after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 90.7% (88.6–92.3) and 74.8% (72.5–76.9) in those aged ≥65, 87.6% (81.4–91.8) and 80.7% (72.8–86.3) in those aged 50–64, 86.6% (71.0–93.8) and 82.7% (56.5–93.1) in those aged 18–50. Vaccine effectiveness against severe complications after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 82.1% (74.6–87.3) and 58.9% (50.3–66.1) in those aged ≥65, 83.0% (69.6–90.5) and 67.1% (47.1–79.6) in those aged 50–64, 78.3% (60.8–88.0) and 77.8% (49.6–90.2) in those aged 18–50. Further risk reduction with the third dose was observed especially in those aged ≥65 years, with vaccine effectiveness of 98.0% (96.5–98.9) for BNT162b2 and 95.5% (93.7–96.8) for CoronaVac against mortality, 90.8% (83.4–94.9) and 88.0% (80.8–92.5) against severe complications. Both CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccination were effective against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and risks decreased further with the third dose

Association of COVID-19 with acute and post-acute risk of multiple different complications and mortality in patients infected with omicron variant stratified by initial disease severity: a cohort study in Hong Kong

Background: Few studies have attempted to use clinical and laboratory parameters to stratify COVID-19 patients with severe versus non-severe initial disease and evaluate age-specific differences in developing multiple different COVID-19-associated disease outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort included patients from the electronic health database of Hong Kong Hospital Authority between 1 January 2022 and 15 August 2022 until 15 November 2022. The cohort was divided into three cohorts by age (≤ 40, 41–64, and ≥ 65 years old). Each age cohort was stratified into four groups: (1) COVID-19 critically exposed group (ICU admission, mechanical ventilation support, CRP > 80 mg/L, or D-dimer > 2 g/mL), (2) severely exposed group (CRP 30–80 mg/L, D-dimer 0.5–2 g/mL, or CT value 40) for the disease outcomes in the acute phase of infection (e.g., mortality risk HR (aged ≤ 40): 1.0 (95%CI: 0.5,2.0), HR (aged 41–64): 2.1 (95%CI: 1.8, 2.6), HR (aged > 65): 4.8 (95%CI: 4.6, 5.1)); while in the post-acute phase, these risks were largely insignificant in those aged 65): 1.5 (95%CI: 1.5,1.6)). Fully vaccinated patients were associated with lower risks of disease outcomes than those receiving less than two doses of vaccination. Conclusions: The risk of multiple different disease outcomes in both acute and post-acute phases increased significantly with the increasing severity of acute COVID-19 illness, specifically among the elderly. Moreover, future studies could improve by risk-stratifying patients based on universally accepted thresholds for clinical parameters, particularly biomarkers, using biological evidence from immunological studies

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Tixagevimab-Cilgavimab: A Target Trial Emulation Study

Background: Immunocompromised individuals are at high risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent severe or fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet they have suboptimal responses to mRNA and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines. The efficacy of tixagevimab–cilgavimab in reducing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was demonstrated in phase III clinical trials. Nevertheless, real-world data on the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab–cilgavimab remain limited. Objective: The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab–cilgavimab among immunocompromised individuals. Methods: Adults who were immunocompromised or receiving immunosuppressive therapies were included in this target trial emulation using territory-wide electronic health records in Hong Kong. A sequential trial emulation approach was adopted to compare effectiveness and safety outcomes between individuals who received tixagevimab–cilgavimab and individuals who did not. Results: A total of 746 tixagevimab–cilgavimab recipients and 2980 controls were included from 1 May 2022 to 30 November 2022. Tixagevimab–cilgavimab significantly reduced the risk of COVID-19 infection (hazard ratio [HR] 0.708, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.527–0.951) during a median follow-up of 60 days. No significant difference was observed in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Zero versus eight COVID-19 mortality cases and zero versus two severe COVID-19 cases were observed in tixagevimab–cilgavimab recipients and controls, respectively. Notably, significant risk reduction in COVID-19 infection was also observed among immunocompromised individuals who had been previously vaccinated with three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no prior COVID-19 infection history. Conclusions: Tixagevimab–cilgavimab was effective in reducing COVID-19 infection among immunocompromised patients during the Omicron wave. Findings were consistent among individuals who previously received three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no previous history of COVID-19 infection