793 research outputs found
Social anxiety and interpretation bias: Examining clinical and subclinical components in adolescents
Pathways through Adolescenc
Recommended from our members
DiseaseConnect: a comprehensive web server for mechanism-based diseaseâdisease connections
The DiseaseConnect (http://disease-connect.org) is a web server for analysis and visualization of a comprehensive knowledge on mechanism-based disease connectivity. The traditional disease classification system groups diseases with similar clinical symptoms and phenotypic traits. Thus, diseases with entirely different pathologies could be grouped together, leading to a similar treatment design. Such problems could be avoided if diseases were classified based on their molecular mechanisms. Connecting diseases with similar pathological mechanisms could inspire novel strategies on the effective repositioning of existing drugs and therapies. Although there have been several studies attempting to generate disease connectivity networks, they have not yet utilized the enormous and rapidly growing public repositories of disease-related omics data and literature, two primary resources capable of providing insights into disease connections at an unprecedented level of detail. Our DiseaseConnect, the first public web server, integrates comprehensive omics and literature data, including a large amount of gene expression data, Genome-Wide Association Studies catalog, and text-mined knowledge, to discover diseaseâdisease connectivity via common molecular mechanisms. Moreover, the clinical comorbidity data and a comprehensive compilation of known drugâdisease relationships are additionally utilized for advancing the understanding of the disease landscape and for facilitating the mechanism-based development of new drug treatments
Selenoprotein gene nomenclature
The human genome contains 25 genes coding for selenocysteine-containing proteins (selenoproteins). These proteins are involved in a variety of functions, most notably redox homeostasis. Selenoprotein enzymes with known functions are designated according to these functions: TXNRD1, TXNRD2, and TXNRD3 (thioredoxin reductases), GPX1, GPX2, GPX3, GPX4 and GPX6 (glutathione peroxidases), DIO1, DIO2, and DIO3 (iodothyronine deiodinases), MSRB1 (methionine-R-sulfoxide reductase 1) and SEPHS2 (selenophosphate synthetase 2). Selenoproteins without known functions have traditionally been denoted by SEL or SEP symbols. However, these symbols are sometimes ambiguous and conflict with the approved nomenclature for several other genes. Therefore, there is a need to implement a rational and coherent nomenclature system for selenoprotein-encoding genes. Our solution is to use the root symbol SELENO followed by a letter. This nomenclature applies to SELENOF (selenoprotein F, the 15 kDa selenoprotein, SEP15), SELENOH (selenoprotein H, SELH, C11orf31), SELENOI (selenoprotein I, SELI, EPT1), SELENOK (selenoprotein K, SELK), SELENOM (selenoprotein M, SELM), SELENON (selenoprotein N, SEPN1, SELN), SELENOO (selenoprotein O, SELO), SELENOP (selenoprotein P, SeP, SEPP1, SELP), SELENOS (selenoprotein S, SELS, SEPS1, VIMP), SELENOT (selenoprotein T, SELT), SELENOV (selenoprotein V, SELV) and SELENOW (selenoprotein W, SELW, SEPW1). This system, approved by the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee, also resolves conflicting, missing and ambiguous designations for selenoprotein genes and is applicable to selenoproteins across vertebrates
Methods and processes for development of a CONSORT extension for reporting pilot randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND: Feasibility and pilot studies are essential components of planning or preparing for a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). They are intended to provide useful information about the feasibility of the main RCT-with the goal of reducing uncertainty and thereby increasing the chance of successfully conducting the main RCT. However, research has shown that there are serious inadequacies in the reporting of pilot and feasibility studies. Reasons for this include a lack of explicit publication policies for pilot and feasibility studies in many journals, unclear definitions of what constitutes a pilot or feasibility RCT/study, and a lack of clarity in the objectives and methodological focus. All these suggest that there is an urgent need for new guidelines for reporting pilot and feasibility studies. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe the methods and processes in our development of an extension to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for reporting pilot and feasibility RCTs, that are executed in preparation for a future, more definitive RCT. METHODS/DESIGN: There were five overlapping parts to the project: (i) the project launch-which involved establishing a working group and conducting a review of the literature; (ii) stakeholder engagement-which entailed consultation with the CONSORT group, journal editors and publishers, the clinical trials community, and funders; (iii) a Delphi process-used to assess the agreement of experts on initial definitions and to generate a reporting checklist for pilot RCTs, based on the 2010 CONSORT statement extension applicable to reporting pilot studies; (iv) a consensus meeting-to discuss, add, remove, or modify checklist items, with input from experts in the field; and (v) write-up and implementation-which included a guideline document which gives an explanation and elaboration (E&E) and which will provide advice for each item, together with examples of good reporting practice. This final part also included a plan for dissemination and publication of the guideline. CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that implementation of our guideline will improve the reporting completeness, transparency, and quality of pilot RCTs, and hence benefit several constituencies, including authors of journal manuscripts, funding agencies, educators, researchers, and end-users
Clinical epigenetics settings for cancer and cardiovascular diseases: real-life applications of network medicine at the bedside
Despite impressive efforts invested in epigenetic research in the last 50 years, clinical applications are still lacking. Only a few university hospital centers currently use epigenetic biomarkers at the bedside. Moreover, the overall concept of precision medicine is not widely recognized in routine medical practice and the reductionist approach remains predominant in treating patients affected by major diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular diseases. By itsâ very nature, epigenetics is integrative of genetic networks. The study of epigenetic biomarkers has led to the identification of numerous drugs with an increasingly significant role in clinical therapy especially of cancer patients. Here, we provide an overview of clinical epigenetics within the context of network analysis. We illustrate achievements to date and discuss how we can move from traditional medicine into the era of network medicine (NM), where pathway-informed molecular diagnostics will allow treatment selection following the paradigm of precision medicine
Recommended from our members
An integrated clinical program and crowdsourcing strategy for genomic sequencing and Mendelian disease gene discovery.
Despite major progress in defining the genetic basis of Mendelian disorders, the molecular etiology of many cases remains unknown. Patients with these undiagnosed disorders often have complex presentations and require treatment by multiple health care specialists. Here, we describe an integrated clinical diagnostic and research program using whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing (WES/WGS) for Mendelian disease gene discovery. This program employs specific case ascertainment parameters, a WES/WGS computational analysis pipeline that is optimized for Mendelian disease gene discovery with variant callers tuned to specific inheritance modes, an interdisciplinary crowdsourcing strategy for genomic sequence analysis, matchmaking for additional cases, and integration of the findings regarding gene causality with the clinical management plan. The interdisciplinary gene discovery team includes clinical, computational, and experimental biomedical specialists who interact to identify the genetic etiology of the disease, and when so warranted, to devise improved or novel treatments for affected patients. This program effectively integrates the clinical and research missions of an academic medical center and affords both diagnostic and therapeutic options for patients suffering from genetic disease. It may therefore be germane to other academic medical institutions engaged in implementing genomic medicine programs
- âŠ