Making a ‘sex-difference fact’:Ambien dosing at the interface of policy, regulation, women’s health, and biology

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) 2013 decision to lower recommended Ambien dosing for women has been widely cited as a hallmark example of the importance of sex differences in biomedicine. Using regulatory documents, scientific publications, and media coverage, this article analyzes the making of this highly influential and mobile ‘sex-difference fact’. As we show, the FDA’s decision was a contingent outcome of the drug approval process. Attending to how a contested sex-difference fact came to anchor elite women’s health advocacy, this article excavates the role of regulatory processes, advocacy groups, and the media in producing perceptions of scientific agreement while foreclosing ongoing debate, ultimately enabling the stabilization of a binary, biological sex-difference fact and the distancing of this fact from its conditions of construction

Interprofessional collaboration between health sciences librarians and health professions faculty to implement a book club discussion for incoming students

Background The following case example provides an overview of one innovative way to engage health professions faculty with health sciences librarians in the development of an interprofessional book discussion and identifies strategies to address implementation challenges. Academic health sciences librarians worked with the Interprofessional Education (IPE) Steering Committee to organize interprofessional book discussion groups for incoming health professions students. This inaugural book discussion brought together students and faculty of different disciplines to engage students in “learning from, with, and about” other professions. Case Presentation When Breath Becomes Air, by Paul Kalanithi, allowed involved discussions on important health sciences issues. The project included outreach, designing pre- and post-surveys, scheduling participants, and communicating with all participants before, during, and after the event. A total of seventy-nine students and thirty-six faculty, representing all health professions schools, participated in the small group IPE book discussions over two weeks. Conclusions Small group book discussions have been shown to be an effective tool to engage students and faculty in IPE. The results of the participant surveys were positive, and the IPE Steering Committee found value in including health sciences librarians throughout the process. Lessons learned from the pilot project include needing an efficient scheduling system, strongly communicating at all stages of the project, and starting the planning process months ahead of time. The IPE Steering Committee plans to conduct similar book discussions every fall semester moving forward and explore options for other IPE events

AURKB-mediated effects on chromatin regulate binding versus release of XIST RNA to the inactive chromosome

How XIST RNA strictly localizes across the inactive X chromosome is unknown; however, prophase release of human XIST RNA provides a clue. Tests of inhibitors that mimic mitotic chromatin modifications implicated an indirect role of PP1 (protein phosphatase 1), potentially via its interphase repression of Aurora B kinase (AURKB), which phosphorylates H3 and chromosomal proteins at prophase. RNA interference to AURKB causes mitotic retention of XIST RNA, unlike other mitotic or broad kinase inhibitors. Thus, AURKB plays an unexpected role in regulating RNA binding to heterochromatin, independent of mechanics of mitosis. H3 phosphorylation (H3ph) was shown to precede XIST RNA release, whereas results exclude H1ph involvement. Of numerous Xi chromatin (chromosomal protein) hallmarks, ubiquitination closely follows XIST RNA retention or release. Surprisingly, H3S10ph staining (but not H3S28ph) is excluded from Xi and is potentially linked to ubiquitination. Results suggest a model of multiple distinct anchor points for XIST RNA. This study advances understanding of RNA chromosome binding and the roles of AURKB and demonstrates a novel approach to manipulate and study XIST RNA

Prone positioning is associated with increased insulin requirements in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19

Stress hyperglycaemia is common in critical illness. We have previously observed that increasing severity of respiratory failure in patients with severe COVID-19 is associated with increased insulin demand. Given previously reported direct effects of hypoxia on insulin action, we reasoned that rapid improvements in oxygenation following prone positioning may improve insulin sensitivity and increase risk of hypoglycaemia. A retrospective multi-centre service evaluation comparing blood glucose and insulin administration in patients with COVID-19 pneumonitis receiving prone mechanical ventilation, comparing the 16 h pre-prone and 16 h post-prone time periods. 155 patients were included in this analysis. Oxygenation improved significantly following prone positioning (change in SpO2/FIO2 per hour prone: 3.01 ± 0.14, P < 0.0001). Glycaemic control was similar during the supine and prone study periods, and there were no hypoglycaemic events in the prone study period. Prone positioning was associated with an unexpected modest but significant increase in insulin requirements (mean difference in total insulin dose (IU): 8.32 ± 2.14, P < 0.001) that was robust to several sensitivity analyses, and could not be explained by changes in carbohydrate intake. We did not observe an increased rate of hypoglycaemia during prone ventilation and the adequacy of glycaemic control was comparable during the supine and prone study periods. Unexpectedly, prone ventilation was associated with an increase in insulin requirements despite significant improvement in hypoxaemia. Our findings support the safety of prone ventilation with respect to glycaemic control and identify a novel relationship between ventilation position and insulin requirements in critical illness

A multi-center prospective study of plant-based nutritional support in adult community-based patients at risk of disease-related malnutrition

IntroductionThere is an emerging need for plant-based, vegan options for patients requiring nutritional support.MethodsTwenty-four adults at risk of malnutrition (age: 59 years (SD 18); Sex: 18 female, 6 male; BMI: 19.0 kg/m2 (SD 3.3); multiple diagnoses) requiring plant-based nutritional support participated in a multi-center, prospective study of a (vegan suitable) multi-nutrient, ready-to-drink, oral nutritional supplement (ONS) [1.5 kcal/mL; 300 kcal, 12 g protein/200 mL bottle, mean prescription 275 mL/day (SD 115)] alongside dietary advice for 28 days. Compliance, anthropometry, malnutrition risk, dietary intake, appetite, acceptability, gastrointestinal (GI) tolerance, nutritional goal(s), and safety were assessed.ResultsPatients required a plant-based ONS due to personal preference/variety (33%), religious/cultural reasons (28%), veganism/reduce animal-derived consumption (17%), environmental/sustainability reasons (17%), and health reasons (5%). Compliance was 94% (SD 16). High risk of malnutrition (‘MUST’ score ≥ 2) reduced from 20 to 16 patients (p = 0.046). Body weight (+0.6 kg (SD 1.2), p = 0.02), BMI (+0.2 kg/m2 (SD 0.5), p = 0.03), total mean energy (+387 kcal/day (SD 416), p &lt; 0.0001) and protein intake (+14 g/day (SD 39), p = 0.03), and the number of micronutrients meeting the UK reference nutrient intake (RNI) (7 vs. 14, p = 0.008) significantly increased. Appetite (Simplified Nutritional Appetite Questionnaire (SNAQ) score; p = 0.13) was maintained. Most GI symptoms were stable throughout the study (p &gt; 0.06) with no serious adverse events related.DiscussionThis study highlights that plant-based nutrition support using a vegan-suitable plant-based ONS is highly complied with, improving the nutritional outcomes of patients at risk of malnutrition

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Demolition by Neglect: An Examination of Charleston\u27s Ordinance

Demolition by neglect is an important issue in the success of a preservation program. The neglect of an historic structure to the point of demolition is a careless and irresponsible occurrence that can be prevented. The tools used to prevent this action can be difficult to enforce, but they also have the potential to be very effective. The demolition by neglect ordinance in Charleston is not effective and is not currently being enforced. This thesis explored the issue of demolition by neglect by examining the public policy issues around it, the methods used to prevent and regulate it, along with a study of two comparable cities - Providence, Rhode Island and Savannah, Georgia - to provide inspiration for the city of Charleston. Three other ordinances were examined as well to provide examples of strong language, tools of enforcement, and other remedies. The effectiveness of Charleston\u27s ordinance was examined through a history of its ordinance, a study of the language of the law and the methods of enforcement within it, as well as an examination of a selection of demolition by neglect cases in Charleston. The information revealed through this analysis demonstrates the need for a new or substantially amended demolition by neglect ordinance in Charleston and provides ideas and directions for this reform effort