Identification of three wheat globulin genes by screening a Triticum aestivum BAC genomic library with cDNA from a diabetes-associated globulin

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Exposure to dietary wheat proteins in genetically susceptible individuals has been associated with increased risk for the development of Type 1 diabetes (T1D). Recently, a wheat protein encoded by cDNA WP5212 has been shown to be antigenic in mice, rats and humans with autoimmune T1D. To investigate the genomic origin of the identified wheat protein cDNA, a hexaploid wheat genomic library from Glenlea cultivar was screened.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three unique wheat globulin genes, <it>Glo-3A</it>, <it>Glo3-B </it>and <it>Glo-3C</it>, were identified. We describe the genomic structure of these genes and their expression pattern in wheat seeds. The <it>Glo-3A </it>gene shared 99% identity with the cDNA of WP5212 at the nucleotide and deduced amino acid level, indicating that we have identified the gene(s) encoding wheat protein WP5212. Southern analysis revealed the presence of multiple copies of <it>Glo-3</it>-like sequences in all wheat samples, including hexaploid, tetraploid and diploid species wheat seed. Aleurone and embryo tissue specificity of WP5212 gene expression, suggested by promoter region analysis, which demonstrated an absence of endosperm specific <it>cis </it>elements, was confirmed by immunofluorescence microscopy using anti-WP5212 antibodies.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Taken together, the results indicate that a diverse group of globulins exists in wheat, some of which could be associated with the pathogenesis of T1D in some susceptible individuals. These data expand our knowledge of specific wheat globulins and will enable further elucidation of their role in wheat biology and human health.</p

Mortality among contraceptive pill users: cohort evidence from Royal College of General Practitioners’ Oral Contraception Study

Objective To see if the mortality risk among women who have used oral contraceptives differs from that of never users

GaPP2, a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain in women:study protocol

Introduction: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) affects more than 1 million UK women with associated healthcare costs of £158 million annually. Current evidence supporting interventions when no underlying pathology is identified is very limited and treatment is frequently inadequate. Gabapentin (a GABA analogue) is efficacious and often well tolerated in other chronic pain conditions. We have completed a successful pilot randomised controlled trial (GaPP1) and here describe the protocol for the definitive multicentre trial to assess the efficacy of gabapentin in the management of CPP in women (GaPP2).Methods and analysis: We plan to perform a double blind placebo controlled randomised multi-centre clinical trial, recruiting 300 women with CPP from more than 8 NHS hospitals within the UK. After randomisation, women will titrate their medication (gabapentin or placebo) over a 4-week period to a maximum of 2700mg or placebo equivalent and will then maintain a stable dose for a 12 week period. Response to treatment will be monitored with validated questionnaires and co-primary outcome measures of average and worst pain scores will be employed. The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that treatment with gabapentin has the potential to provide an effective oral treatment to alleviate pain in women with CPP in the absence of any obvious pelvic pathology.Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Coventry and Warwick Research Ethics Committee (REC 15/WM/0036). Data will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. We will make the information obtained from the study available to the public through national bodies and charities.Trial registration number: ISRCTN7745176

The association between long-term DDT or DDE exposures and an altered sperm epigenome-a cross-sectional study of Greenlandic Inuit and South African VhaVenda men

Please read abstract in the article.The South African Medical Research Council, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the CIHR.https://ehp.niehs.nih.govhj2024School of Health Systems and Public Health (SHSPH)UP Centre for Sustainable Malaria Control (UP CSMC)SDG-03:Good heatlh and well-bein

The establishment, maintenance, and adaptation of high- and low-impact chronic pain: a framework for biopsychosocial pain research

We present a framework for the study of states of chronic pain and transitions between those states. We capture in the framework the dynamic nature of pain: people live with pain that changes over time. First, we offer definitions of both acute and chronic pain and explore the contextual considerations related to the common use of this temporal dichotomy. Second, we promote the importance of incorporating the impact pain has on a person's life. Finally, we discuss the challenges and opportunities inherent in implementing this common approach. Our goal is to produce a framework for the study of the development, maintenance, and resolution of chronic pain. Whether a single brief event or a constant feature of life, pain interrupts to prioritise protection, interferes with activity, reduces quality of life, and can alter identity.44 Protection is achieved by escape from harm, avoidance of perceived danger, withdrawal for respite and repair, and communication of incapacity and environmental risk; longer-term protection is achieved by learning the cues for pain and injury.53 From this perspective, pain is most usefully considered a need state, fundamentally a motivational drive to protect.49 This approach centres our attention on the consequences of pain for the person in their context, on its duration and its impact

Gabapentin for chronic pelvic pain in women (GaPP2):a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundChronic pelvic pain affects 2–24% of women worldwide and evidence for medical treatments is scarce. Gabapentin is effective in treating some chronic pain conditions. We aimed to measure the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in women with chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.MethodsWe performed a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 39 UK hospital centres. Eligible participants were women with chronic pelvic pain (with or without dysmenorrhoea or dyspareunia) of at least 3 months duration. Inclusion criteria were 18–50 years of age, use or willingness to use contraception to avoid pregnancy, and no obvious pelvic pathology at laparoscopy, which must have taken place at least 2 weeks before consent but less than 36 months previously. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive gabapentin (titrated to a maximum dose of 2700 mg daily) or matching placebo for 16 weeks. The online randomisation system minimised allocations by presence or absence of dysmenorrhoea, psychological distress, current use of hormonal contraceptives, and hospital centre. The appearance, route, and administration of the assigned intervention were identical in both groups. Patients, clinicians, and research staff were unaware of the trial group assignments throughout the trial. Participants were unmasked once they had provided all outcome data at week 16–17, or sooner if a serious adverse event requiring knowledge of the study drug occurred. The dual primary outcome measures were worst and average pain scores assessed separately on a numerical rating scale in weeks 13–16 after randomisation, in the intention-to-treat population. Self-reported adverse events were assessed according to intention-to-treat principles. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISCRTN77451762.FindingsParticipants were screened between Nov 30, 2015, and March 6, 2019, and 306 were randomly assigned (153 to gabapentin and 153 to placebo). There were no significant between-group differences in both worst and average numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 13–16 weeks after randomisation. The mean worst NRS pain score was 7·1 (standard deviation [SD] 2·6) in the gabapentin group and 7·4 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·4 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and −1·2 (SD 2·1) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·20 [97·5% CI −0·81 to 0·42]; p=0·47). The mean average NRS pain score was 4·3 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and 4·5 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was −1·1 (SD 2·0) in the gabapentin group and −0·9 (SD 1·8) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference −0·18 [97·5% CI −0·71 to 0·35]; p=0·45). More women had a serious adverse event in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group (10 [7%] of 153 in the gabapentin group compared with 3 [2%] of 153 in the placebo group; p=0·04). Dizziness, drowsiness, and visual disturbances were more common in the gabapentin group.InterpretationThis study was adequately powered, but treatment with gabapentin did not result in significantly lower pain scores in women with chronic pelvic pain, and was associated with higher rates of side-effects than placebo. Given the increasing reports of abuse and evidence of potential harms associated with gabapentin use, it is important that clinicians consider alternative treatment options to off-label gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.FundingNational Institute for Health Research