Placental uptake and metabolism of 25(OH)vitamin D determine its activity within the fetoplacental unit

Pregnancy 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations are associated with maternal and fetal health outcomes. Using physiological human placental perfusion and villous explants, we investigate the role of the placenta in regulating the relationships between maternal 25(OH)D and fetal physiology. We demonstrate active placental uptake of 25(OH)D3 by endocytosis, placental metabolism of 25(OH)D3 into 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 and active 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D3], with subsequent release of these metabolites into both the maternal and fetal circulations. Active placental transport of 25(OH)D3 and synthesis of 1,25(OH)2D3 demonstrate that fetal supply is dependent on placental function rather than simply the availability of maternal 25(OH)D3. We demonstrate that 25(OH)D3 exposure induces rapid effects on the placental transcriptome and proteome. These map to multiple pathways central to placental function and thereby fetal development, independent of vitamin D transfer. Our data suggest that the underlying epigenetic landscape helps dictate the transcriptional response to vitamin D treatment. This is the first quantitative study demonstrating vitamin D transfer and metabolism by the human placenta, with widespread effects on the placenta itself. These data demonstrate a complex interplay between vitamin D and the placenta and will inform future interventions using vitamin D to support fetal development and maternal adaptations to pregnancy.</jats:p

Placental uptake and metabolism of 25(OH)vitamin D determine its activity within the fetoplacental unit

Funder: Gerald Kerkut Charitable Trust; FundRef: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012166Funder: Rank PrizeFunder: NIHR Clinical LectureshipPregnancy 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations are associated with maternal and fetal health outcomes. Using physiological human placental perfusion and villous explants, we investigate the role of the placenta in regulating the relationships between maternal 25(OH)D and fetal physiology. We demonstrate active placental uptake of 25(OH)D3 by endocytosis, placental metabolism of 25(OH)D3 into 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 and active 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D3], with subsequent release of these metabolites into both the maternal and fetal circulations. Active placental transport of 25(OH)D3 and synthesis of 1,25(OH)2D3 demonstrate that fetal supply is dependent on placental function rather than simply the availability of maternal 25(OH)D3. We demonstrate that 25(OH)D3 exposure induces rapid effects on the placental transcriptome and proteome. These map to multiple pathways central to placental function and thereby fetal development, independent of vitamin D transfer. Our data suggest that the underlying epigenetic landscape helps dictate the transcriptional response to vitamin D treatment. This is the first quantitative study demonstrating vitamin D transfer and metabolism by the human placenta, with widespread effects on the placenta itself. These data demonstrate a complex interplay between vitamin D and the placenta and will inform future interventions using vitamin D to support fetal development and maternal adaptations to pregnancy.CS was funded by a Gerald Kerkut Charitable Trust studentship and BA by Rank Prize and University of Southampton Vice Chancellor’s Studentships plus the MRC. KMG was supported by the UK Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12011/4), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR Senior Investigator [NF-SI-0515-10042], NIHR Southampton 1000DaysPlus Global Nutrition Research Group [17/63/154], and NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre [IS-BRC-1215-20004]), British Heart Foundation (RG/15/17/3174) and the US National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health (Award No. U24AG047867). KSJ was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (ISBRC-1215-20014). The NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre is a partnership between Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Cambridge, funded by the NIHR. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. Experimental work performed by KSJ and FH at MRC. EWL was supported by Dr Ann Prentice (UK Medical Research Council U105960371). The SWS has been supported by grants from Medical Research Council (MRC) (4050502589 [MRC LEU]), Dunhill Medical Trust, British Heart Foundation, Food Standards Agency, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013), project EarlyNutrition, under grant agreement 289346 and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (LIFECYCLE, grant agreement no. 733206). EC has been supported by the Wellcome Trust (201268/Z/16/Z) and an NIHR Clinical Lectureship. Work leading to these results was supported by the BBSRC (HDHL-Biomarkers, BB/P028179/1), as part of the ALPHABET project, supported by an award made through the ERA-Net on Biomarkers for Nutrition and Health (ERA HDHL), Horizon 2020 grant agreement number 696295. The proteomic analyses (SDG and AM) were financially supported by the National Institutes of Health (R21AI122389) and the Beckman Institute at the California Institute of Technology. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement InvADeRS no. 841172 to JMF. The electron microscopy image in Figure 2 was produced with help of the Biomedical imaging unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

A review of complementary and alternative treatments for autism spectrum disorders. Autism Res Treat

Given the severe and chronic problems associated with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and the limitations of available treatments, there exists a large public health need for additional interventions. As more parents are inquiring about complementary and alternative treatments (CATs), both parents and practitioners require up-to-date information about them and whether and how to integrate them into treatment. After presenting data on CAT usage patterns for ASD, we review 13 ingestible (i.e., orally administered) and 6 noningestible (i.e., externally administered) CATs for ASD. For each CAT we briefly describe its definition; rationale for use; current research support, limitations, and future directions; safety issues; and whether we currently recommend, not recommend, or find it acceptable for the treatment of ASD. We conclude this paper with recommendations for future research and ten clinical recommendations for practitioners

A Review of Complementary and Alternative Treatments for Autism Spectrum Disorders

Given the severe and chronic problems associated with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and the limitations of available treatments, there exists a large public health need for additional interventions. As more parents are inquiring about complementary and alternative treatments (CATs), both parents and practitioners require up-to-date information about them and whether and how to integrate them into treatment. After presenting data on CAT usage patterns for ASD, we review 13 ingestible (i.e., orally administered) and 6 noningestible (i.e., externally administered) CATs for ASD. For each CAT we briefly describe its definition; rationale for use; current research support, limitations, and future directions; safety issues; and whether we currently recommend, not recommend, or find it acceptable for the treatment of ASD. We conclude this paper with recommendations for future research and ten clinical recommendations for practitioners

Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial of Neurofeedback for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder With 13-Month Follow-up

Objective: To determine whether theta/beta-ratio (TBR) electroencephalographic biofeedback (neurofeedback [NF]) has a specific effect on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) beyond nonspecific benefit. Method: In a 2-site double-blind randomized clinical trial, 144 children aged 7 to 10 years with rigorously diagnosed moderate/severe ADHD and theta/beta-ratio (TBR) ≥4.5 were randomized 3:2 to deliberate TBR downtraining versus a control of equal duration, intensity, and appearance. Two early dropouts left 142 children for modified intent-to-treat analysis. The control used prerecorded electroencephalograms with the participant's artifacts superimposed. Treatment was programmed via Internet by an off-site statistician-guided co-investigator. Fidelity was 98.7% by trainers/therapists and 93.2% by NF expert monitor. The primary outcome was parent- and teacher-rated inattention; analysis was mixed-effects regression. Because the expense and effort of NF can be justified only by enduring benefit, follow-ups were integrated. Results: Blinding was excellent. Although both groups showed significant improvement (p <.001, d = 1.5) in parent/teacher-rated inattention from baseline to treatment end and 13-month follow-up, NF was not significantly superior to the control condition at either time point on this primary outcome (d = 0.01, p =.965 at treatment end; d = 0.23, p =.412 at 13-month follow-up). Responders (Clinical Global Impression−Improvement [CGI-I] = 1−2) were 61% of NF and 54% of controls (p =.36). Adverse events were distributed proportionally between treatments. The 13-month follow-up found nonsignificant improvement from treatment end for NF (d = 0.1), with mild deterioration for controls (d = −0.07). NF required significantly less medication at follow-up (p =.012). Conclusion: This study does not support a specific effect of deliberate TBR NF at either treatment end or 13-month follow-up. Participants will be reassessed at 25-month follow-up. Clinical trial registration information: Double-Blind 2-Site Randomized Clinical Trial of Neurofeedback for ADHD; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT02251743