Autoantibodies against type I IFNs in patients with critical influenza pneumonia

In an international cohort of 279 patients with hypoxemic influenza pneumonia, we identified 13 patients (4.6%) with autoantibodies neutralizing IFN-alpha and/or -omega, which were previously reported to underlie 15% cases of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia and one third of severe adverse reactions to live-attenuated yellow fever vaccine. Autoantibodies neutralizing type I interferons (IFNs) can underlie critical COVID-19 pneumonia and yellow fever vaccine disease. We report here on 13 patients harboring autoantibodies neutralizing IFN-alpha 2 alone (five patients) or with IFN-omega (eight patients) from a cohort of 279 patients (4.7%) aged 6-73 yr with critical influenza pneumonia. Nine and four patients had antibodies neutralizing high and low concentrations, respectively, of IFN-alpha 2, and six and two patients had antibodies neutralizing high and low concentrations, respectively, of IFN-omega. The patients' autoantibodies increased influenza A virus replication in both A549 cells and reconstituted human airway epithelia. The prevalence of these antibodies was significantly higher than that in the general population for patients 70 yr of age (3.1 vs. 4.4%, P = 0.68). The risk of critical influenza was highest in patients with antibodies neutralizing high concentrations of both IFN-alpha 2 and IFN-omega (OR = 11.7, P = 1.3 x 10(-5)), especially those <70 yr old (OR = 139.9, P = 3.1 x 10(-10)). We also identified 10 patients in additional influenza patient cohorts. Autoantibodies neutralizing type I IFNs account for similar to 5% of cases of life-threatening influenza pneumonia in patients <70 yr old

Subsequent Event Risk in Individuals with Established Coronary Heart Disease:Design and Rationale of the GENIUS-CHD Consortium

BACKGROUND: The "GENetIcs of sUbSequent Coronary Heart Disease" (GENIUS-CHD) consortium was established to facilitate discovery and validation of genetic variants and biomarkers for risk of subsequent CHD events, in individuals with established CHD. METHODS: The consortium currently includes 57 studies from 18 countries, recruiting 185,614 participants with either acute coronary syndrome, stable CHD or a mixture of both at baseline. All studies collected biological samples and followed-up study participants prospectively for subsequent events. RESULTS: Enrollment into the individual studies took place between 1985 to present day with duration of follow up ranging from 9 months to 15 years. Within each study, participants with CHD are predominantly of self-reported European descent (38%-100%), mostly male (44%-91%) with mean ages at recruitment ranging from 40 to 75 years. Initial feasibility analyses, using a federated analysis approach, yielded expected associations between age (HR 1.15 95% CI 1.14-1.16) per 5-year increase, male sex (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13-1.21) and smoking (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.35-1.51) with risk of subsequent CHD death or myocardial infarction, and differing associations with other individual and composite cardiovascular endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: GENIUS-CHD is a global collaboration seeking to elucidate genetic and non-genetic determinants of subsequent event risk in individuals with established CHD, in order to improve residual risk prediction and identify novel drug targets for secondary prevention. Initial analyses demonstrate the feasibility and reliability of a federated analysis approach. The consortium now plans to initiate and test novel hypotheses as well as supporting replication and validation analyses for other investigators

Higher COVID-19 pneumonia risk associated with anti-IFN-α than with anti-IFN-ω auto-Abs in children

We found that 19 (10.4%) of 183 unvaccinated children hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia had autoantibodies (auto-Abs) neutralizing type I IFNs (IFN-alpha 2 in 10 patients: IFN-alpha 2 only in three, IFN-alpha 2 plus IFN-omega in five, and IFN-alpha 2, IFN-omega plus IFN-beta in two; IFN-omega only in nine patients). Seven children (3.8%) had Abs neutralizing at least 10 ng/ml of one IFN, whereas the other 12 (6.6%) had Abs neutralizing only 100 pg/ml. The auto-Abs neutralized both unglycosylated and glycosylated IFNs. We also detected auto-Abs neutralizing 100 pg/ml IFN-alpha 2 in 4 of 2,267 uninfected children (0.2%) and auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-omega in 45 children (2%). The odds ratios (ORs) for life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia were, therefore, higher for auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-alpha 2 only (OR [95% CI] = 67.6 [5.7-9,196.6]) than for auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-. only (OR [95% CI] = 2.6 [1.2-5.3]). ORs were also higher for auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations (OR [95% CI] = 12.9 [4.6-35.9]) than for those neutralizing low concentrations (OR [95% CI] = 5.5 [3.1-9.6]) of IFN-omega and/or IFN-alpha 2

LES ENJEUX DE L’HISTOIRE DES BOMBARDEMENTS DU HAVRE-RÉSULTATS ET NOUVELLES PISTES (interventions recueillies, résumées et présentées sous la direction de John Barzman): Publication de l'ULHN (Université Le Havre Normandie), 20 juillet 2016

Avec la collaboration de l'UMR IDEESInternational audienceRésumé de la journée du projet de recherche "Normandie 44-Mémoire des bombardements de 1944 en Normandie et dans le monde" du Grand Réseau de Recherche Culture et Société en Normandie (GRR CSN)-Axe « Patrimoine, mémoire, modernité », au cours de laquelle plusieurs participants au projet et commentateurs extérieurs ont échangé leurs analyses des résultats et des nouvelles poistes de réflexion ouvertes par ce projet, autour du livre Bombardements 44: Le Havre, Normandie, France, Europe, sld de John Barzman, Corinne Bouillot et Andrew Knapp, Rouen: PURH, 2014

LES ENJEUX DE L’HISTOIRE DES BOMBARDEMENTS DU HAVRE-RÉSULTATS ET NOUVELLES PISTES (interventions recueillies, résumées et présentées sous la direction de John Barzman): Publication de l'ULHN (Université Le Havre Normandie), 20 juillet 2016

Avec la collaboration de l'UMR IDEESInternational audienceRésumé de la journée du projet de recherche "Normandie 44-Mémoire des bombardements de 1944 en Normandie et dans le monde" du Grand Réseau de Recherche Culture et Société en Normandie (GRR CSN)-Axe « Patrimoine, mémoire, modernité », au cours de laquelle plusieurs participants au projet et commentateurs extérieurs ont échangé leurs analyses des résultats et des nouvelles poistes de réflexion ouvertes par ce projet, autour du livre Bombardements 44: Le Havre, Normandie, France, Europe, sld de John Barzman, Corinne Bouillot et Andrew Knapp, Rouen: PURH, 2014

La plume et le sabre

Histoire d’une presse en Révolution, histoire militaire aux multiples facettes, histoire du Consulat et de l’Empire sont autant de thèmes chers à Jean-Paul Bertaud, tant dans ses activités d’inlassable chercheur que par son constant souci d’intégrer ses découvertes à son enseignement, qui a passionné des générations successives d’étudiants. D’un livre à l’autre, ses travaux nous ont donné à voir les réalités contrastées de l’entreprise de presse, les portraits de ceux qui prenaient la plume, intégrant les recherches en cours, en histoire politique comme en histoire culturelle, en histoire sociale comme en histoire militaire. Cette dernière, en profond renouvellement depuis trente ans, a vu Jean-Paul Bertaud engagé sur tous les fronts, du récit classique des batailles aux dimensions anthropologiques du combat et des combattants. Ce temps est certes celui de la Révolution française, mais peut-être surtout celui du Consulat et de l’Empire, dont Jean-Paul Bertaud est devenu l’un des spécialistes reconnus. Jeunes historiens s’inscrivant dans son sillage, auteurs plus chevronnés qui ont souvent été ses compagnons de recherche, chercheurs étrangers qui témoignent du rayonnement international de ses travaux, tous, avec le présent ouvrage, ont voulu rendre hommage au chercheur, à l’enseignant, à l’homme enfin. Les nombreuses contributions ici rassemblées apportent de multiples éclairages sur la presse de la fin de l’Ancien Régime au premières décennies du xixe siècle, sur les diverses manières d’aborder l’histoire militaire, sur les acteurs historiques et les espaces européens à l’époque du Consulat et de l’Empire

K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: Evaluation, classification, and stratification

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease as a public health problem. Chronic kidney disease is a worldwide public health problem. In the United States, there is a rising incidence and prevalence of kidney failure, with poor outcomes and high cost. There is an even higher prevalence of earlier stages of chronic kidney disease. Increasing evidence, accrued in the past decades, indicates that the adverse outcomes of chronic kidney disease, such as kidney failure, cardiovascular disease, and premature death, can be prevented or delayed. Earlier stages of chronic kidney disease can be detected through laboratory testing. Treatment of earlier stages of chronic kidney disease is effective in slowing the progression toward kidney failure. Initiation of treatment for cardiovascular risk factors at earlier stages of chronic kidney disease should be effective in reducing cardiovascular disease events both before and after the onset of kidney failure. Unfortunately, chronic kidney disease is "under-diagnosed" and "under-treated" in the United States, resulting in lost opportunities for prevention. One reason is the lack of agreement on a definition and classification of stages in the progression of chronic kidney disease. A clinically applicable classification would be based on laboratory evaluation of the severity of kidney disease, association of level of kidney function with complications, and stratification of risks for loss of kidney function and development of cardiovascular disease. Charge to the K/DOQI work group on chronic kidney disease. In 2000, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) Advisory Board approved development of clinical practice guidelines to define chronic kidney disease and to classify stages in the progression of chronic kidney disease. The Work Group charged with developing the guidelines consisted of experts in nephrology, pediatric nephrology, epidemiology, laboratory medicine, nutrition, social work, gerontology, and family medicine. An Evidence Review Team, consisting of nephrologists and methodologists, was responsible for assembling the evidence. Defining chronic kidney disease and classifying the stages of severity would provide a common language for communication among providers, patients and their families, investigators, and policy-makers and a framework for developing a public health approach to affect care and improve outcomes of chronic kidney disease. A uniform terminology would permit: 1. More reliable estimates of the prevalence of earlier stages of disease and of the population at increased risk for development of chronic kidney disease 2. Recommendations for laboratory testing to detect earlier stages and progression to later stages 3. Associations of stages with clinical manifestations of disease 4. Evaluation of factors associated with a high risk of progression from one stage to the next or of development of other adverse outcomes 5. Evaluation of treatments to slow progression or prevent other adverse outcomes. Clinical practice guidelines, clinical performance measures, and continuous quality improvement efforts could then be directed to stages of chronic kidney disease. The Work Group did not specifically address evaluation and treatment for chronic kidney disease. However, this guideline contains brief reference to diagnosis and clinical interventions and can serve as a "road map" linking other clinical practice guidelines and pointing out where other guidelines need to be developed. Eventually, K/DOQI will include interventional guidelines. The first three of these, on bone disease, dyslipidemia, and blood pressure management are currently under development. Other guidelines on cardiovascular disease in dialysis patients and kidney biopsy will be initiated in the Winter of 2001. This report contains a summary of background information available at the time the Work Group began its deliberations, the 15 guidelines and the accompanying rationale, suggestions for clinical performance measures, a clinical approach to chronic kidney disease using these guidelines, and appendices to describe methods for the review of evidence. The guidelines are based on a systematic review of the literature and the consensus of the Work Group. The guidelines have been reviewed by the K/DOQI Advisory Board, a large number of professional organizations and societies, selected experts, and interested members of the public and have been approved by the Board of Directors of the NKF. Framework. The Work Group defined "chronic kidney disease" to include conditions that affect the kidney, with the potential to cause either progressive loss of kidney function or complications resulting from decreased kidney function. Chronic kidney disease was thus defined as the presence of kidney damage or decreased level of kidney function for three months or more, irrespective of diagnosis. The target population includes individuals with chronic kidney disease or at increased risk of developing chronic kidney disease. The majority of topics focus on adults (age ≥18 years). Many of the same principles apply to children as well. In particular, the classification of stages of disease and principles of diagnostic testing are similar. A subcommittee of the Work Group examined issues related to children and participated in development of the first six guidelines of the present document. However, there are sufficient differences between adults and children in the association of GFR with signs and symptoms of uremia and in stratification of risk for adverse outcomes that these latter issues are addressed only for adults. A separate set of guidelines for children will have to be developed by a later Work Group. The target audience includes a wide range of individuals: those who have or are at increased risk of developing chronic kidney disease (the target population) and their families; health care professionals caring for the target population; manufacturers of instruments and diagnostic laboratories performing measurements of kidney function; agencies and institutions planning, providing or paying for the health care needs of the target population; and investigators studying chronic kidney disease. There will be only brief reference to clinical interventions, sufficient to provide a basis for other clinical practice guidelines relevant to the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Subsequent K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines will be based on the framework developed here. Definition of chronic kidney disease. Why "Kidney"? The word "kidney" is of Middle English origin and is immediately understood by patients, their families, providers, health care professionals, and the lay public of native English speakers. On the other hand, "renal" and "nephrology," derived from Latin and Greek roots, respectively, commonly require interpretation and explanation. The Work Group and the NKF are committed to communicating in language that can be widely understood, hence the preferential use of "kidney" throughout these guidelines. The term "End-Stage Renal Disease" (ESRD) has been retained because of its administrative usage in the United States referring to patients treated by dialysis or transplantation, irrespective of their level of kidney function. Why Develop a New Classification? Currently, there is no uniform classification of the stages of chronic kidney disease. A review of textbooks and journal articles clearly demonstrates ambiguity and overlap in the meaning of current terms. The Work Group concluded that uniform definitions of terms and stages would improve communication between patients and providers, enhance public education, and promote dissemination of research results. In addition, it was believed that uniform definitions would enhance conduct of clinical research. Why Base a New Classification System on Severity of Disease? Adverse outcomes of kidney disease are based on the level of kidney function and risk of loss of function in the future. Chronic kidney disease tends to worsen over time. Therefore, the risk of adverse outcomes increases over time with disease severity. Many disciplines in medicine, including related specialties of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and transplantation, have adopted classification systems based on severity to guide clinical interventions, research, and professional and public education. Such a model is essential for any public health approach to disease. Why Classify Severity as the Level of GFR? The level of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is widely accepted as the best overall measure of kidney function in health and disease. Providers and patients are familiar with the concept that "the kidney is like a filter." GFR is the best measure of the kidneys' ability to filter blood. In addition, expressing the level of kidney function on a continuous scale allows development of patient and public education programs that encourage individuals to "Know your number!" The term "GFR" is not intuitively evident to anyone. Rather, it is a learned term, which allows the ultimate expression of the complex functions of the kidney in one single numerical expression. Conversely, numbers are an intuitive concept and easily understandable by everyone