4 research outputs found

    Elucidation of glutamine lipid biosynthesis in marine bacteria reveals its importance under phosphorus deplete growth in Rhodobacteraceae

    Get PDF
    Marine microorganisms employ multiple strategies to cope with transient and persistent nutrient limitation, one of which, for alleviating phosphorus (P) stress, is to substitute membrane glycerophospholipids with non-P containing surrogate lipids. Such a membrane lipid remodelling strategy enables the most abundant marine phytoplankton and heterotrophic bacteria to adapt successfully to nutrient scarcity in marine surface waters. An important group of non-P lipids, the aminolipids which lack a diacylglycerol backbone, are poorly studied in marine microbes. Here, using a combination of genetic, lipidomics and metagenomics approaches, we reveal for the first time the genes (glsB, olsA) required for the formation of the glutamine-containing aminolipid. Construction of a knockout mutant in either glsB or olsA in the model marine bacterium Ruegeria pomeroyi DSS-3 completely abolished glutamine lipid production. Moreover, both mutants showed a considerable growth cost under P-deplete conditions and the olsA mutant, that is unable to produce the glutamine and ornithine aminolipids, ceased to grow under P-deplete conditions. Analysis of sequenced microbial genomes show that glsB is primarily confined to the Rhodobacteraceae family, which includes the ecologically important marine Roseobacter clade that are key players in the marine sulphur and nitrogen cycles. Analysis of the genes involved in glutamine lipid biosynthesis in the Tara ocean metagenome dataset revealed the global occurrence of glsB in marine surface waters and a positive correlation between glsB abundance and N* (a measure of the deviation from the canonical Redfield ratio), suggesting glutamine lipid plays an important role in the adaptation of marine Rhodobacteraceae to P limitation

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

    No full text
    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

    No full text
    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
    corecore