Role of MrgA in Peroxide and Light Stress in the Cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803.

In the unicellular cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803, the mrgA gene is part of the PerR regulon that is upregulated during peroxide stress. We determined that an ΔmrgA mutant was highly sensitive to low peroxide levels and that the mutant upregulated a gene cluster (sll1722-26) that encoded enzymes involved with exopolymeric substance (EPS) production. We made mutants in this EPS cluster in both a wild type and ΔmrgA background and studied the responses to oxidative stress by measuring cell damage with LIVE/DEAD stain. We show that Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 becomes highly sensitive to oxidative stress when either mrgA or the sll1722-26 EPS components are deleted. The results suggest that the deletion of the EPS cluster makes a cell highly susceptible to cell damage, under moderate oxidative stress conditions. Mutations in either mrgA or the EPS cluster also result in cells that are more light and peroxide sensitive, and produce significantly less EPS material than in wild type. In this study, we show that in the absence of MrgA, which is known to be involved in the storage or mobilization of iron, cells can be more easily damaged by exogenous oxidative and light stress

Sotatercept safety and effects on hemoglobin, bone, and vascular calcification

Introduction: Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) exhibit anemia, chronic kidney disease‒mineral bone disorder (CKD-MBD), and cardiovascular disease. The REN-001 and REN-002 phase II, multicenter, randomized studies examined safety, tolerability, and effects of sotatercept, an ActRIIA-IgG1 fusion protein trap, on hemoglobin concentration; REN-001 also explored effects on bone mineral density (BMD) and abdominal aortic vascular calcification. Methods: Forty-three patients were treated in REN-001 (dose range: sotatercept 0.3‒0.7 mg/kg or placebo subcutaneously [s.c.] for 200 days) and 50 in REN-002 (dose range: 0.1‒0.4 mg/kg i.v. and 0.13‒0.5 mg/kg s.c. for 99 days). Results: In REN-001, frequency of achieving target hemoglobin response (\u3e10 g/dl [6.21 mmol/l]) with sotatercept was dose-related and greater than placebo (0.3 mg/kg: 33.3%; 0.5 mg/kg: 62.5%; 0.7 mg/kg: 77.8%; 0.7 mg/kg [doses 1 and 2]/0.4 mg/kg [doses 3‒15]: 33.3%; placebo: 27.3%). REN-002 hemoglobin findings were similar (i.v.: 16.7%-57.1%; s.c.: 11.1%‒42.9%). Dose-related achievement of ≥2% increase in femoral neck cortical BMD was seen among only REN-001 patients receiving sotatercept (0.3‒0.7 mg/kg: 20.0%‒57.1%; placebo: 0.0%). Abdominal aortic vascular calcification was slowed in a dose-related manner, with a ≤15% increase in Agatston score achieved by more REN-001 sotatercept versus placebo patients (60%‒100% vs. 16.7%). The most common adverse events during treatment were hypertension, muscle spasm, headache, arteriovenous fistula site complication, and influenza observed in both treatment and placebo groups. Conclusion: In patients with ESKD, sotatercept exhibited a favorable safety profile and was associated with trends in dose-related slowing of vascular calcification. Less-consistent trends in improved hemoglobin concentration and BMD were observed

Pre-gastrula expression of zebrafish extraembryonic genes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many species form extraembryonic tissues during embryogenesis, such as the placenta of humans and other viviparous mammals. Extraembryonic tissues have various roles in protecting, nourishing and patterning embryos. Prior to gastrulation in zebrafish, the yolk syncytial layer - an extraembryonic nuclear syncytium - produces signals that induce mesoderm and endoderm formation. Mesoderm and endoderm precursor cells are situated in the embryonic margin, an external ring of cells along the embryo-yolk interface. The yolk syncytial layer initially forms below the margin, in a domain called the external yolk syncytial layer (E-YSL).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We hypothesize that key components of the yolk syncytial layer's mesoderm and endoderm inducing activity are expressed as mRNAs in the E-YSL. To identify genes expressed in the E-YSL, we used microarrays to compare the transcription profiles of intact pre-gastrula embryos with pre-gastrula embryonic cells that we had separated from the yolk and yolk syncytial layer. This identified a cohort of genes with enriched expression in intact embryos. Here we describe our whole mount <it>in situ </it>hybridization analysis of sixty-eight of them. This includes ten genes with E-YSL expression (<it>camsap1l1</it>, <it>gata3</it>, <it>znf503</it>, <it>hnf1ba</it>, <it>slc26a1</it>, <it>slc40a1</it>, <it>gata6</it>, <it>gpr137bb</it>, <it>otop1 </it>and <it>cebpa</it>), four genes with expression in the enveloping layer (EVL), a superficial epithelium that protects the embryo (<it>zgc:136817</it>, <it>zgc:152778</it>, <it>slc14a2 </it>and <it>elovl6l</it>), three EVL genes whose expression is transiently confined to the animal pole (<it>elovl6l</it>, <it>zgc:136359 </it>and <it>clica</it>), and six genes with transient maternal expression (<it>mtf1</it>, <it>wu:fj59f04</it>, <it>mospd2</it>, <it>rftn2</it>, <it>arrdc1a </it>and <it>pho</it>). We also assessed the requirement of Nodal signaling for the expression of selected genes in the E-YSL, EVL and margin. Margin expression was Nodal dependent for all genes we tested, including the concentrated margin expression of an EVL gene: <it>zgc:110712</it>. All other instances of EVL and E-YSL expression that we tested were Nodal independent.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We have devised an effective strategy for enriching and identifying genes expressed in the E-YSL of pre-gastrula embryos. To our surprise, maternal genes and genes expressed in the EVL were also enriched by this strategy. A number of these genes are promising candidates for future functional studies on early embryonic patterning.</p

Development and validation of the Arizona Cognitive Test Battery for Down syndrome

Neurocognitive assessment in individuals with intellectual disabilities requires a well-validated test battery. To meet this need, the Arizona Cognitive Test Battery (ACTB) has been developed specifically to assess the cognitive phenotype in Down syndrome (DS). The ACTB includes neuropsychological assessments chosen to 1) assess a range of skills, 2) be non-verbal so as to not confound the neuropsychological assessment with language demands, 3) have distributional properties appropriate for research studies to identify genetic modifiers of variation, 4) show sensitivity to within and between sample differences, 5) have specific correlates with brain function, and 6) be applicable to a wide age range and across contexts. The ACTB includes tests of general cognitive ability and prefrontal, hippocampal and cerebellar function. These tasks were drawn from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Testing Automated Battery (CANTAB) and other established paradigms. Alongside the cognitive testing battery we administered benchmark and parent-report assessments of cognition and behavior. Individuals with DS (n = 74, ages 7–38 years) and mental age (MA) matched controls (n = 50, ages 3–8 years) were tested across 3 sites. A subsample of these groups were used for between-group comparisons, including 55 individuals with DS and 36 mental age matched controls. The ACTB allows for low floor performance levels and participant loss. Floor effects were greater in younger children. Individuals with DS were impaired on a number ACTB tests in comparison to a MA-matched sample, with some areas of spared ability, particularly on tests requiring extensive motor coordination. Battery measures correlated with parent report of behavior and development. The ACTB provided consistent results across contexts, including home vs. lab visits, cross-site, and among individuals with a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds and differences in ethnicity. The ACTB will be useful in a range of outcome studies, including clinical trials and the identification of important genetic components of cognitive disability

Correction to: Rapid, Full-Scale Change to Virtual PCIT During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implementation and Clinical Implications

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic

Patterns of HIV-1 Protein Interaction Identify Perturbed Host-Cellular Subsystems

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) exploits a diverse array of host cell functions in order to replicate. This is mediated through a network of virus-host interactions. A variety of recent studies have catalogued this information. In particular the HIV-1, Human Protein Interaction Database (HHPID) has provided a unique depth of protein interaction detail. However, as a map of HIV-1 infection, the HHPID is problematic, as it contains curation error and redundancy; in addition, it is based on a heterogeneous set of experimental methods. Based on identifying shared patterns of HIV-host interaction, we have developed a novel methodology to delimit the core set of host-cellular functions and their associated perturbation from the HHPID. Initially, using biclustering, we identify 279 significant sets of host proteins that undergo the same types of interaction. The functional cohesiveness of these protein sets was validated using a human protein-protein interaction network, gene ontology annotation and sequence similarity. Next, using a distance measure, we group host protein sets and identify 37 distinct higher-level subsystems. We further demonstrate the biological significance of these subsystems by cross-referencing with global siRNA screens that have been used to detect host factors necessary for HIV-1 replication, and investigate the seemingly small intersect between these data sets. Our results highlight significant host-cell subsystems that are perturbed during the course of HIV-1 infection. Moreover, we characterise the patterns of interaction that contribute to these perturbations. Thus, our work disentangles the complex set of HIV-1-host protein interactions in the HHPID, reconciles these with siRNA screens and provides an accessible and interpretable map of infection

Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes

Stratification of women according to their risk of breast cancer based on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) could improve screening and prevention strategies. Our aim was to develop PRSs, optimized for prediction of estrogen receptor (ER)-specific disease, from the largest available genome-wide association dataset and to empirically validate the PRSs in prospective studies. The development dataset comprised 94,075 case subjects and 75,017 control subjects of European ancestry from 69 studies, divided into training and validation sets. Samples were genotyped using genome-wide arrays, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected by stepwise regression or lasso penalized regression. The best performing PRSs were validated in an independent test set comprising 11,428 case subjects and 18,323 control subjects from 10 prospective studies and 190,040 women from UK Biobank (3,215 incident breast cancers). For the best PRSs (313 SNPs), the odds ratio for overall disease per 1 standard deviation in ten prospective studies was 1.61 (95%CI: 1.57-1.65) with area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) = 0.630 (95%CI: 0.628-0.651). The lifetime risk of overall breast cancer in the top centile of the PRSs was 32.6%. Compared with women in the middle quintile, those in the highest 1% of risk had 4.37- and 2.78-fold risks, and those in the lowest 1% of risk had 0.16- and 0.27-fold risks, of developing ER-positive and ER-negative disease, respectively. Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that this PRS was well calibrated and predicts disease risk accurately in the tails of the distribution. This PRS is a powerful and reliable predictor of breast cancer risk that may improve breast cancer prevention programs.NovartisEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaAbbViePfizer UKCelgeneEisaiGenentechMerck Sharp and DohmeRocheCancer Research UKGovernment of CanadaArray BioPharmaGenome CanadaNational Institutes of HealthEuropean CommissionMinistère de l'Économie, de l’Innovation et des Exportations du QuébecSeventh Framework ProgrammeCanadian Institutes of Health Researc

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P &lt; 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials