Pharmacological activation of constitutive androstane receptor induces female-specific modulation of hepatic metabolism

Background & Aims: The constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) is a nuclear receptor that binds diverse xenobiotics and whose activation leads to the modulation of the expression of target genes involved in xenobiotic detoxification and energy metabolism. Although CAR hepatic activity is considered to be higher in women than in men, its sex-dependent response to an acute pharmacological activation has seldom been investigated. Methods: The hepatic transcriptome, plasma markers, and hepatic metabolome, were analysed in Car+/+ and Car-/- male and female mice treated either with the CAR-specific agonist 1,4-bis[2-(3,5-dichloropyridyloxy)]benzene (TCPOBOP) or with vehicle. Results: Although 90% of TCPOBOP-sensitive genes were modulated in a sex-independent manner, the remaining 10% showed almost exclusive female liver specificity. These female-specific CAR-sensitive genes were mainly involved in xenobiotic metabolism, inflammation, and extracellular matrix organisation. CAR activation also induced higher hepatic oxidative stress and hepatocyte cytolysis in females than in males. Hepatic expression of flavin monooxygenase 3 (Fmo3) was almost abolished and was associated with a decrease in hepatic trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO) concentration in TCPOBOP-treated females. In line with a potential role in the control of TMAO homeostasis, CAR activation decreased platelet hyper-responsiveness in female mice supplemented with dietary choline. Conclusions: More than 10% of CAR-sensitive genes are sex-specific and influence hepatic and systemic responses such as platelet aggregation. CAR activation may be an important mechanism of sexually-dimorphic drug-induced liver injury. Impact and implications: CAR is activated by many drugs and pollutants. Its pharmacological activation had a stronger impact on hepatic gene expression and metabolism in females than in males, and had a specific impact on liver toxicity and trimethylamine metabolism. Sexual dimorphism should be considered when testing and/or prescribing xenobiotics known to activate CAR

Diversifying the genomic data science research community

Over the past 20 years, the explosion of genomic data collection and the cloud computing revolution have made computational and data science research accessible to anyone with a web browser and an internet connection. However, students at institutions with limited resources have received relatively little exposure to curricula or professional development opportunities that lead to careers in genomic data science. To broaden participation in genomics research, the scientific community needs to support these programs in local education and research at underserved institutions (UIs). These include community colleges, historically Black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribal colleges and universities that support ethnically, racially, and socioeconomically underrepresented students in the United States. We have formed the Genomic Data Science Community Network to support students, faculty, and their networks to identify opportunities and broaden access to genomic data science. These opportunities include expanding access to infrastructure and data, providing UI faculty development opportunities, strengthening collaborations among faculty, recognizing UI teaching and research excellence, fostering student awareness, developing modular and open-source resources, expanding course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), building curriculum, supporting student professional development and research, and removing financial barriers through funding programs and collaborator support

NIH Aging and Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Omics Data Ecosystem Workshop

On July 11th and 12th, 2024 the National Institute on Aging (NIA) will hold a hybrid workshop that will convene major omics resources used by the Aging and Alzheimer's Disease Related dementias research community to identify strategies and opportunities to establish a more effective omics data ecosystem to accelerate and improve NIA-supported omics research. This workshop called "An Aging and AD/ADRD Omics Data Ecosystem: Interoperability Challenges and Opportunities" builds on a workshop from June 2023 - See linked projec

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health