Absent expansion of AXIN2+ hepatocytes and altered physiology in Axin2CreERT2 mice challenges the role of pericentral hepatocytes in homeostatic liver regeneration

Background & Aims: Mouse models of lineage tracing have helped to describe the important subpopulations of hepatocytes responsible for liver regeneration. However, conflicting results have been obtained from different models. Herein, we aimed to reconcile these conflicting reports by repeating a key lineage-tracing study from pericentral hepatocytes and characterising this Axin2CreERT2 model in detail. Methods: We performed detailed characterisation of the labelled population in the Axin2CreERT2 model. We lineage traced this cell population, quantifying the labelled population over 1 year and performed in-depth phenotypic comparisons, including transcriptomics, metabolomics and analysis of proteins through immunohistochemistry, of Axin2CreERT2 mice to WT counterparts. Results: We found that after careful definition of a baseline population, there are marked differences in labelling between male and female mice. Upon induced lineage tracing there was no expansion of the labelled hepatocyte population in Axin2CreERT2 mice. We found substantial evidence of disrupted homeostasis in Axin2CreERT2 mice. Offspring are born with sub-Mendelian ratios and adult mice have perturbations of hepatic Wnt/β-catenin signalling and related metabolomic disturbance. Conclusions: We find no evidence of predominant expansion of the pericentral hepatocyte population during liver homeostatic regeneration. Our data highlight the importance of detailed preclinical model characterisation and the pitfalls which may occur when comparing across sexes and backgrounds of mice and the effects of genetic insertion into native loci. Impact and implications: Understanding the source of cells which regenerate the liver is crucial to harness their potential to regrow injured livers. Herein, we show that cells which were previously thought to repopulate the liver play only a limited role in physiological regeneration. Our data helps to reconcile differing conclusions drawn from results from a number of prior studies and highlights methodological challenges which are relevant to preclinical models more generally

Value-creation space: The role of events in a service-dominant marketing paradigm

This paper provides a new conceptual contribution to our understanding of the value of events, examining their potential through the lens of service dominant logic. Through a conceptual analysis and discussion, augmented by a small-scale and exploratory empirical study using semi-structured interviews, it evaluates the growing resonance of events in modern-day marketing. The paper advances the conception of ‘value-creation space’ as an overarching term to coalesce the otherwise disparate range of organisational events that have marketing imperative and/or impact. The underpinning virtues of events are recognised and used to build a discussion that can provide a coherent basis for further conceptual development. The findings depict considerable synergy between the collaborative nature of events and the service dominant logic notions of co-creation (or co-destruction), and co-production. However, an intuitive and well-executed event marketing approach is critical to events' continued success as value-creation spaces

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used