On malfunctioning software

Artefacts do not always do what they are supposed to, due to a variety of reasons, including manufacturing problems, poor maintenance, and normal wear-and-tear. Since software is an artefact, it should be subject to malfunctioning in the same sense in which other artefacts can malfunction. Yet, whether software is on a par with other artefacts when it comes to malfunctioning crucially depends on the abstraction used in the analysis. We distinguish between “negative” and “positive” notions of malfunction. A negative malfunction, or dysfunction, occurs when an artefact token either does not (sometimes) or cannot (ever) do what it is supposed to. A positive malfunction, or misfunction, occurs when an artefact token may do what is supposed to but, at least occasionally, it also yields some unintended and undesirable effects. We argue that software, understood as type, may misfunction in some limited sense, but cannot dysfunction. Accordingly, one should distinguish software from other technical artefacts, in view of their design that makes dysfunction impossible for the former, while possible for the latter

Combined T2 and diffusion-weighted MR Imaging with template prostate biopsies in men suspected with prostate cancer but negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies

PURPOSE: Transperineal template prostate (TPB) biopsy has been shown to improve prostate cancer detection in men with rising PSA and previous negative TRUS biopsies. Diagnostic performance of this approach especially MR imaging and using reliable reference standard remains scantly reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 patients, who were previously TRUS biopsy negative, were recruited in this study. All the participants had at least 28-core TPB under general anesthetic within 8 weeks of previous negative TRUS biopsies. In 15 men undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, prostate specimens were sectioned using custom-made molds and analyzed by experienced pathologist as a feasibility study. RESULTS: In total, 120 of 200 patients (60 %) had positive TPB biopsy results. All of these men had at least one negative biopsy from transrectal route. T2 diffusion-weighted MR imaging showed no lesion in almost one-third of these men (61/200; 30.5 %). Out of these, 33 (33/61; 54 %) showed malignancy on TPB including high-grade tumors (>Gleason 7). Out of 15 patients underwent surgery with a total of 52 lesions (mean 3.5) on radical prostatectomy histology analyses, TPB detected 36 (70 %) lesions only. Some of these lesions were Gleason 7 and more mostly located in the posterior basal area of prostate. CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal template biopsy technique is associated with significantly high prostate cancer detection rate in men with previous negative TRUS biopsies, however compared to radical prostatectomy histology map, a significant number of lesions can still be missed in the posterior and basal area of prostate

Current understanding of the relationship between cervical manipulation and stroke: what does it mean for the chiropractic profession?

The understanding of the relationship between cervical manipulative therapy (CMT) and vertebral artery dissection and stroke (VADS) has evolved considerably over the years. In the beginning the relationship was seen as simple cause-effect, in which CMT was seen to cause VADS in certain susceptible individuals. This was perceived as extremely rare by chiropractic physicians, but as far more common by neurologists and others. Recent evidence has clarified the relationship considerably, and suggests that the relationship is not causal, but that patients with VADS often have initial symptoms which cause them to seek care from a chiropractic physician and have a stroke some time after, independent of the chiropractic visit

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

A second update on mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

Matters Arising From: COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03767-x (2021)Data availability: Summary statistics generated by the COVID-19 HGI are available online, including per-ancestry summary statistics for African, admixed American, East Asian, European and South Asian ancestries (https://www.covid19hg.org/results/r7/). The analyses described here used the data release 7. If available, individual-level data can be requested directly from contributing studies, listed in Supplementary Table 1. We used publicly available data from GTEx (https://gtexportal.org/home/), the Neale laboratory (http://www.nealelab.is/uk-biobank/), the Finucane laboratory (https://www.finucanelab.org), the FinnGen Freeze 4 cohort (https://www.finngen.fi/en/access_results) and the eQTL catalogue release 3 (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/eqtl/).Code availability: The code for summary statistics lift-over, the projection PCA pipeline including precomputed loadings and meta-analyses (https://github.com/covid19-hg/); for heritability estimation (https://github.com/AndrewsLabUCSF/COVID19_heritability); for Mendelian randomization and genetic correlation (https://github.com/marcoralab/MRcovid); and subtype analyses (https://github.com/mjpirinen/covid19-hgi_subtypes) are available at GitHub.Reporting summary: Further information on research design is available in the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article online at: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06355-3#MOESM2 .Supplementary information is available online at: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06355-3#Sec4 .Copyright © The Author(s) 2023. Investigating the role of host genetic factors in COVID-19 severity and susceptibility can inform our understanding of the underlying biological mechanisms that influence adverse outcomes and drug development1,2. Here we present a second updated genome-wide association study (GWAS) on COVID-19 severity and infection susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 from the COVID-19 Host Genetic Initiative (data release 7). We performed a meta-analysis of up to 219,692 cases and over 3 million controls, identifying 51 distinct genome-wide significant loci—adding 28 loci from the previous data release2. The increased number of candidate genes at the identified loci helped to map three major biological pathways that are involved in susceptibility and severity: viral entry, airway defence in mucus and type I interferon

Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Background Appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to determine whether existing risk prediction models can reliably identify patients presenting to hospital in the UK with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain who are at low risk of appendicitis. Methods A systematic search was completed to identify all existing appendicitis risk prediction models. Models were validated using UK data from an international prospective cohort study that captured consecutive patients aged 16–45 years presenting to hospital with acute RIF in March to June 2017. The main outcome was best achievable model specificity (proportion of patients who did not have appendicitis correctly classified as low risk) whilst maintaining a failure rate below 5 per cent (proportion of patients identified as low risk who actually had appendicitis). Results Some 5345 patients across 154 UK hospitals were identified, of which two‐thirds (3613 of 5345, 67·6 per cent) were women. Women were more than twice as likely to undergo surgery with removal of a histologically normal appendix (272 of 964, 28·2 per cent) than men (120 of 993, 12·1 per cent) (relative risk 2·33, 95 per cent c.i. 1·92 to 2·84; P < 0·001). Of 15 validated risk prediction models, the Adult Appendicitis Score performed best (cut‐off score 8 or less, specificity 63·1 per cent, failure rate 3·7 per cent). The Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score performed best for men (cut‐off score 2 or less, specificity 24·7 per cent, failure rate 2·4 per cent). Conclusion Women in the UK had a disproportionate risk of admission without surgical intervention and had high rates of normal appendicectomy. Risk prediction models to support shared decision‐making by identifying adults in the UK at low risk of appendicitis were identified