The Type and the Position of HNF1A Mutation Modulate Age at Diagnosis of Diabetes in Patients with Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY)-3

OBJECTIVE—The clinical expression of maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY)-3 is highly variable. This may be due to environmental and/or genetic factors, including molecular characteristics of the hepatocyte nuclear factor 1-α (HNF1A) gene mutation. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—We analyzed the mutations identified in 356 unrelated MODY3 patients, including 118 novel mutations, and searched for correlations between the genotype and age at diagnosis of diabetes. RESULTS—Missense mutations prevailed in the dimerization and DNA-binding domains (74%), while truncating mutations were predominant in the transactivation domain (62%). The majority (83%) of the mutations were located in exons 1- 6, thus affecting the three HNF1A isoforms. Age at diagnosis of diabetes was lower in patients with truncating mutations than in those with missense mutations (18 vs. 22 years, P = 0.005). Missense mutations affecting the dimerization/DNA-binding domains were associated with a lower age at diagnosis than those affecting the transactivation domain (20 vs. 30 years, P = 10−4). Patients with missense mutations affecting the three isoforms were younger at diagnosis than those with missense mutations involving one or two isoforms (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS—These data show that part of the variability of the clinical expression in MODY3 patients may be explained by the type and the location of HNF1A mutations. These findings should be considered in studies for the search of additional modifier genetic factors

Metagenomic Analysis of Lysogeny in Tampa Bay: Implications for Prophage Gene Expression

Phage integrase genes often play a role in the establishment of lysogeny in temperate phage by catalyzing the integration of the phage into one of the host's replicons. To investigate temperate phage gene expression, an induced viral metagenome from Tampa Bay was sequenced by 454/Pyrosequencing. The sequencing yielded 294,068 reads with 6.6% identifiable. One hundred-three sequences had significant similarity to integrases by BLASTX analysis (e≤0.001). Four sequences with strongest amino-acid level similarity to integrases were selected and real-time PCR primers and probes were designed. Initial testing with microbial fraction DNA from Tampa Bay revealed 1.9×107, and 1300 gene copies of Vibrio-like integrase and Oceanicola-like integrase L−1 respectively. The other two integrases were not detected. The integrase assay was then tested on microbial fraction RNA extracted from 200 ml of Tampa Bay water sampled biweekly over a 12 month time series. Vibrio-like integrase gene expression was detected in three samples, with estimated copy numbers of 2.4-1280 L−1. Clostridium-like integrase gene expression was detected in 6 samples, with estimated copy numbers of 37 to 265 L−1. In all cases, detection of integrase gene expression corresponded to the occurrence of lysogeny as detected by prophage induction. Investigation of the environmental distribution of the two expressed integrases in the Global Ocean Survey Database found the Vibrio-like integrase was present in genome equivalents of 3.14% of microbial libraries and all four viral metagenomes. There were two similar genes in the library from British Columbia and one similar gene was detected in both the Gulf of Mexico and Sargasso Sea libraries. In contrast, in the Arctic library eleven similar genes were observed. The Clostridium-like integrase was less prevalent, being found in 0.58% of the microbial and none of the viral libraries. These results underscore the value of metagenomic data in discovering signature genes that play important roles in the environment through their expression, as demonstrated by integrases in lysogeny

Water-Soluble Fullerene (C60) Derivatives as Nonviral Gene-Delivery Vectors

A new class of water-soluble C60 transfecting agents has been prepared using Hirsch-Bingel chemistry and assessed for their ability to act as gene-delivery vectors in vitro. In an effort to elucidate the relationship between the hydrophobicity of the fullerene core, the hydrophilicity of the water-solubilizing groups, and the overall charge state of the C60 vectors in gene delivery and expression, several different C60 derivatives were synthesized to yield either positively charged, negatively charged, or neutral chemical functionalities under physiological conditions. These fullerene derivatives were then tested for their ability to transfect cells grown in culture with DNA carrying the green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter gene. Statistically significant expression of GFP was observed for all forms of the C60 derivatives when used as DNA vectors and compared to the ability of naked DNA alone to transfect cells. However, efficient in vitro transfection was only achieved with the two positively charged C60 derivatives, namely, an octa-amino derivatized C60 and a dodeca-amino derivatized C60 vector. All C60 vectors showed an increase in toxicity in a dose-dependent manner. Increased levels of cellular toxicity were observed for positively charged C60 vectors relative to the negatively charged and neutral vectors. Structural analyses using dynamic light scattering and optical microscopy offered further insights into possible correlations between the various derivatized C60 compounds, the C60 vector/DNA complexes, their physical attributes (aggregation, charge) and their transfection efficiencies. Recently, similar Gd@C60-based compounds have demonstrated potential as advanced contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Thus, the successful demonstration of intracellular DNA uptake, intracellular transport, and gene expression from DNA using C60 vectors suggests the possibility of developing analogous Gd@C60-based vectors to serve simultaneously as both therapeutic and diagnostic agents

Quantifying defects in graphene via Raman spectroscopy at different excitation energies.

We present a Raman study of Ar(+)-bombarded graphene samples with increasing ion doses. This allows us to have a controlled, increasing, amount of defects. We find that the ratio between the D and G peak intensities, for a given defect density, strongly depends on the laser excitation energy. We quantify this effect and present a simple equation for the determination of the point defect density in graphene via Raman spectroscopy for any visible excitation energy. We note that, for all excitations, the D to G intensity ratio reaches a maximum for an interdefect distance ∼3 nm. Thus, a given ratio could correspond to two different defect densities, above or below the maximum. The analysis of the G peak width and its dispersion with excitation energy solves this ambiguity

Safety and immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in children in Sierra Leone: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial

Background—Children account for a substantial proportion of cases and deaths from Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vectorbased vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from the Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in a paediatric population in Sierra Leone. Methods—This randomised, double-blind, controlled trial was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. Healthy children and adolescents aged 1–17 years were enrolled in three age cohorts (12–17 years, 4–11 years, and 1–3 years) and randomly assigned (3:1), via computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight), to receive an intramuscular injection of either Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles; first dose) followed by MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units; second dose) on day 57 (Ebola vaccine group), or a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo (second dose) on day 57 (control group). Study team personnel (except for those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation), participants, and their parents or guardians were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was safety, measured as the occurrence of solicited local and systemic adverse symptoms during 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited systemic adverse events during 28 days after each vaccination, abnormal laboratory results during the study period, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events throughout the study period. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity (humoral immune response), measured as the concentration of Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibodies at 21 days after the second dose. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine and had available reactogenicity data, and immunogenicity was assessed in all participants who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. Findings—From April 4, 2017, to July 5, 2018, 576 eligible children or adolescents (192 in each of the three age cohorts) were enrolled and randomly assigned. The most common solicited local adverse event during the 7 days after the first and second dose was injection-site pain in all age groups, with frequencies ranging from 0% (none of 48) of children aged 1–3 years after placebo injection to 21% (30 of 144) of children aged 4–11 years after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination. The most frequently observed solicited systemic adverse event during the 7 days was headache in the 12–17 years and 4–11 years age cohorts after the first and second dose, and pyrexia in the 1–3 years age cohort after the first and second dose. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first and second dose vaccinations was malaria in all age cohorts, irrespective of the vaccine types. Following vaccination with MenACWY, severe thrombocytopaenia was observed in one participant aged 3 years. No other clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were observed in other study participants, and no serious adverse events related to the Ebola vaccine regimen were reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second dose of the Ebola virus vaccine regimen were observed in 131 (98%) of 134 children aged 12–17 years (9929 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 8172–12 064]), in 119 (99%) of 120 aged 4–11 years (10 212 EU/mL [8419–12 388]), and in 118 (98%) of 121 aged 1–3 years (22 568 EU/mL [18 426–27 642]). Interpretation—The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen was well tolerated with no safety concerns in children aged 1–17 years, and induced robust humoral immune responses, suggesting suitability of this regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in children

Safety and long-term immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in adults in Sierra Leone: a combined open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2 trial

Background The Ebola epidemics in west Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo highlight an urgent need for safe and effective vaccines to prevent Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in Sierra Leone, a country previously affected by Ebola. Methods The trial comprised two stages: an open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2. The study was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. In stage 1, healthy adults (aged ≥18 years) residing in or near Kambia district, received an intramuscular injection of Ad26.ZEBOV (5×1010 viral particles) on day 1 (first dose) followed by an intramuscular injection of MVA-BN-Filo (1×108 infectious units) on day 57 (second dose). An Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination was offered at 2 years after the first dose to stage 1 participants. The eligibility criteria for adult participants in stage 2 were consistent with stage 1 eligibility criteria. Stage 2 participants were randomly assigned (3:1), by computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive web-response system, to receive either the Ebola vaccine regimen (Ad26.ZEBOV followed by MVA-BN-Filo) or an intramuscular injection of a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo on day 57 (second dose; control group). Study team personnel, except those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation, and participants were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was the safety of the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen, which was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine. Safety was assessed as solicited local and systemic adverse events occurring in the first 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited adverse events occurring in the first 28 days after each vaccination, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events occurring up to each participant’s last study visit. Secondary outcomes were to assess Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second vaccine in a per-protocol set of participants (ie, those who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response) and to assess the safety and tolerability of the Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination in stage 1 participants who had received the booster dose. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. Findings Between Sept 30, 2015, and Oct 19, 2016, 443 participants (43 in stage 1 and 400 in stage 2) were enrolled; 341 participants assigned to receive the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo regimen and 102 participants assigned to receive the MenACWY and placebo regimen received at least one dose of study vaccine. Both regimens were well tolerated with no safety concerns. In stage 1, solicited local adverse events (mostly mild or moderate injection-site pain) were reported in 12 (28%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in six (14%) participants after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited local adverse events were reported in 51 (17%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 58 (24%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 17 (17%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in eight (9%) of 86 after placebo injection. In stage 1, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 18 (42%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in 17 (40%) after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 161 (54%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 107 (43%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 51 (50%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in 39 (45%) of 86 after placebo injection. Solicited systemic adverse events in both stage 1 and 2 participants included mostly mild or moderate headache, myalgia, fatigue, and arthralgia. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first dose was headache in stage 1 and malaria in stage 2. Malaria was the most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the second dose in both stage 1 and 2. No serious adverse event was considered related to the study vaccine, and no immediate reportable events were observed. In stage 1, the safety profile after the booster vaccination was not notably different to that observed after the first dose. Vaccine-induced humoral immune responses were observed in 41 (98%) of 42 stage 1 participants (geometric mean binding antibody concentration 4784 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 3736–6125]) and in 176 (98%) of 179 stage 2 participants (3810 EU/mL [3312–4383]) at 21 days after the second vaccination. Interpretation The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen was well tolerated and immunogenic, with persistent humoral immune responses. These data support the use of this vaccine regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in adults