Cellular dissection of psoriasis for transcriptome analyses and the post-GWAS era

Abstract Background Genome-scale studies of psoriasis have been used to identify genes of potential relevance to disease mechanisms. For many identified genes, however, the cell type mediating disease activity is uncertain, which has limited our ability to design gene functional studies based on genomic findings. Methods We identified differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with altered expression in psoriasis lesions (n = 216 patients), as well as candidate genes near susceptibility loci from psoriasis GWAS studies. These gene sets were characterized based upon their expression across 10 cell types present in psoriasis lesions. Susceptibility-associated variation at intergenic (non-coding) loci was evaluated to identify sites of allele-specific transcription factor binding. Results Half of DEGs showed highest expression in skin cells, although the dominant cell type differed between psoriasis-increased DEGs (keratinocytes, 35%) and psoriasis-decreased DEGs (fibroblasts, 33%). In contrast, psoriasis GWAS candidates tended to have highest expression in immune cells (71%), with a significant fraction showing maximal expression in neutrophils (24%, P < 0.001). By identifying candidate cell types for genes near susceptibility loci, we could identify and prioritize SNPs at which susceptibility variants are predicted to influence transcription factor binding. This led to the identification of potentially causal (non-coding) SNPs for which susceptibility variants influence binding of AP-1, NF-κB, IRF1, STAT3 and STAT4. Conclusions These findings underscore the role of innate immunity in psoriasis and highlight neutrophils as a cell type linked with pathogenetic mechanisms. Assignment of candidate cell types to genes emerging from GWAS studies provides a first step towards functional analysis, and we have proposed an approach for generating hypotheses to explain GWAS hits at intergenic loci.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/109537/1/12920_2013_Article_485.pd

Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling disease that is sometimes difficult to treat. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce pain in most patients with CRPS, some do not achieve the desired reduction in pain. Moreover, the pain reduction can diminish over time even after an initially successful period of SCS. Pain reduction can be regained by increasing the SCS frequency, but this has not been investigated in a prospective trial. This study compares pain reduction using five SCS frequencies (standard 40 Hz, 500 Hz, 1200 Hz, burst and placebo stimulation) in patients with CRPS to determine which of the modalities is most effective. DESIGN: All patients with a confirmed CRPS diagnosis that have unsuccessfully tried all other therapies and are eligible for SCS, can enroll in this trial (primary implantation group). CRPS patients that already receive SCS therapy, or those previously treated with SCS but with loss of therapeutic effect over time, can also participate (re-implantation group). Once all inclusion criteria are met and written informed consent obtained, patients will undergo a baseline assessment (T0). A 2-week trial with SCS is performed and, if successful, a rechargeable internal pulse generator (IPG) is implanted. For the following 3 months the patient will have standard 40 Hz stimulation therapy before a follow-up assessment (T1) is performed. Those who have completed the T1 assessment will enroll in a 10-week crossover period in which the five SCS frequencies are tested in five periods, each frequency lasting for 2 weeks. At the end of the crossover period, the patient will choose which frequency is to be used for stimulation for an additional 3 months, until the T2 assessment. DISCUSSION: Currently no trials are available that systematically investigate the importance of variation in frequency during SCS in patients with CRPS. Data from this trial will provide better insight as to whether SCS with a higher frequency, or with burst stimulation, results in more effective pain relief. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN3665525