Stochastic models for CD4+ T cells

In this thesis, we study the mechanisms involved in CD4+ T cell activation focusing on the crucial role of costimulation for an effective immune response. For this purpose, interactions between receptors from T cells and ligands on the APCs, as well as the trafficking of these molecules, need to be analysed. At the same time, population models are developed to study their homeostatic behaviour and the role of IL-2, as well as quorum-sensing mechanisms in CD4+ T cell maintenance. A multidisciplinary approach that combines statistical analysis of experimental data and mathematical models that describe the experiments, has been used that take into account the stochastic nature of these processes. We have combined deterministic methods when appropriate with stochastic ones, as well as made us of numerical simulations

MELD 3.0 adequately predicts mortality and renal replacement therapy requirements in patients with alcohol-associated hepatitis

Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score better predicts mortality in alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) but could underestimate severity in women and malnourished patients. Using a global cohort, we assessed the ability of the MELD 3.0 score to predict short-term mortality in AH. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to hospital with AH from 2009 to 2019. The main outcome was all-cause 30-day mortality. We compared the AUC using DeLong's method and also performed a time-dependent AUC with competing risks analysis. A total of 2,124 patients were included from 28 centres from 10 countries on three continents (median age 47.2 ± 11.2 years, 29.9% women, 71.3% with underlying cirrhosis). The median MELD 3.0 score at admission was 25 (20-33), with an estimated survival of 73.7% at 30 days. The MELD 3.0 score had a better performance in predicting 30-day mortality (AUC:0.761, 95%CI:0.732-0.791) compared with MELD sodium (MELD-Na; AUC: 0.744, 95% CI: 0.713-0.775; p = 0.042) and Maddrey's discriminant function (mDF) (AUC: 0.724, 95% CI: 0.691-0.757; p = 0.013). However, MELD 3.0 did not perform better than traditional MELD (AUC: 0.753, 95% CI: 0.723-0.783; p = 0.300) and Age-Bilirubin-International Normalised Ratio-Creatinine (ABIC) (AUC:0.757, 95% CI: 0.727-0.788; p = 0.765). These results were consistent in competing-risk analysis, where MELD 3.0 (AUC: 0.757, 95% CI: 0.724-0.790) predicted better 30-day mortality compared with MELD-Na (AUC: 0.739, 95% CI: 0.708-0.770; p = 0.028) and mDF (AUC:0.717, 95% CI: 0.687-0.748; p = 0.042). The MELD 3.0 score was significantly better in predicting renal replacement therapy requirements during admission compared with the other scores (AUC: 0.844, 95% CI: 0.805-0.883). MELD 3.0 demonstrated better performance compared with MELD-Na and mDF in predicting 30-day and 90-day mortality, and was the best predictor of renal replacement therapy requirements during admission for AH. However, further prospective studies are needed to validate its extensive use in AH. Severe AH has high short-term mortality. The establishment of treatments and liver transplantation depends on mortality prediction. We evaluated the performance of the new MELD 3.0 score to predict short-term mortality in AH in a large global cohort. MELD 3.0 performed better in predicting 30- and 90-day mortality compared with MELD-Na and mDF, but was similar to MELD and ABIC scores. MELD 3.0 was the best predictor of renal replacement therapy requirements. Thus, further prospective studies are needed to support the wide use of MELD 3.0 in AH

Role of TBX20 Truncating Variants in Dilated Cardiomyopathy and Left Ventricular Noncompaction

Less than 40% of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) have a pathogenic/likely pathogenic genetic variant identified. TBX20 has been linked to congenital heart defects; although an association with left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) and DCM has been proposed, it is still considered a gene with limited evidence for these phenotypes. This study sought to investigate the association between the TBX20 truncating variant (TBX20tv) and DCM/LVNC. TBX20 was sequenced by next-generation sequencing in 7463 unrelated probands with a diagnosis of DCM or LVNC, 22 773 probands of an internal comparison group (hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, channelopathies, or aortic diseases), and 124 098 external controls (individuals from the gnomAD database). Enrichment of TBX20tv in DCM/LVNC was calculated, cosegregation was determined in selected families, and clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed in carriers. TBX20tv was enriched in DCM/LVNC (24/7463; 0.32%) compared with internal (1/22 773; 0.004%) and external comparison groups (4/124 098; 0.003%), with odds ratios of 73.23 (95% CI, 9.90-541.45; P <0.0001) and 99.76 (95% CI, 34.60-287.62; P <0.0001), respectively. TBX20tv was cosegregated with DCM/LVNC phenotype in 21 families for a combined logarythm of the odds score of 4.53 (strong linkage). Among 57 individuals with TBX20tv (49.1% men; mean age, 35.9±20.8 years), 41 (71.9%) exhibited DCM/LVNC, of whom 14 (34.1%) had also congenital heart defects. After a median follow-up of 6.9 (95% CI, 25-75:3.6-14.5) years, 9.7% of patients with DCM/LVNC had end-stage heart failure events and 4.8% experienced malignant ventricular arrhythmias. TBX20tv is associated with DCM/LVNC; congenital heart defect is also present in around one-third of cases. TBX20tv -associated DCM/LVNC is characterized by a nonaggressive phenotype, with a low incidence of major cardiovascular events. TBX20 should be considered a definitive gene for DCM and LVNC and routinely included in genetic testing panels for these phenotypes

Memorias del primer Simposio Nacional de Ciencias Agronómicas

Primer simposio nacional de Ciencias Agronómicas: El renacer del espacio de discusión científica para el Agro colombiano

Memorias del primer Simposio Nacional de Ciencias Agronómicas

Primer simposio nacional de Ciencias Agronómicas: El renacer del espacio de discusión científica para el Agro colombiano

A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study

© 2023Background: The benefit of pharmacogenetic testing before starting drug therapy has been well documented for several single gene–drug combinations. However, the clinical utility of a pre-emptive genotyping strategy using a pharmacogenetic panel has not been rigorously assessed. Methods: We conducted an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised, crossover implementation study of a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel in 18 hospitals, nine community health centres, and 28 community pharmacies in seven European countries (Austria, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK). Patients aged 18 years or older receiving a first prescription for a drug clinically recommended in the guidelines of the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (ie, the index drug) as part of routine care were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included previous genetic testing for a gene relevant to the index drug, a planned duration of treatment of less than 7 consecutive days, and severe renal or liver insufficiency. All patients gave written informed consent before taking part in the study. Participants were genotyped for 50 germline variants in 12 genes, and those with an actionable variant (ie, a drug–gene interaction test result for which the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group [DPWG] recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) were treated according to DPWG recommendations. Patients in the control group received standard treatment. To prepare clinicians for pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing, local teams were educated during a site-initiation visit and online educational material was made available. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions within the 12-week follow-up period. Analyses were irrespective of patient adherence to the DPWG guidelines. The primary analysis was done using a gatekeeping analysis, in which outcomes in people with an actionable drug–gene interaction in the study group versus the control group were compared, and only if the difference was statistically significant was an analysis done that included all of the patients in the study. Outcomes were compared between the study and control groups, both for patients with an actionable drug–gene interaction test result (ie, a result for which the DPWG recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) and for all patients who received at least one dose of index drug. The safety analysis included all participants who received at least one dose of a study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03093818 and is closed to new participants. Findings: Between March 7, 2017, and June 30, 2020, 41 696 patients were assessed for eligibility and 6944 (51·4 % female, 48·6% male; 97·7% self-reported European, Mediterranean, or Middle Eastern ethnicity) were enrolled and assigned to receive genotype-guided drug treatment (n=3342) or standard care (n=3602). 99 patients (52 [1·6%] of the study group and 47 [1·3%] of the control group) withdrew consent after group assignment. 652 participants (367 [11·0%] in the study group and 285 [7·9%] in the control group) were lost to follow-up. In patients with an actionable test result for the index drug (n=1558), a clinically relevant adverse drug reaction occurred in 152 (21·0%) of 725 patients in the study group and 231 (27·7%) of 833 patients in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·54–0·91]; p=0·0075), whereas for all patients, the incidence was 628 (21·5%) of 2923 patients in the study group and 934 (28·6%) of 3270 patients in the control group (OR 0·70 [95% CI 0·61–0·79]; p <0·0001). Interpretation: Genotype-guided treatment using a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel significantly reduced the incidence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions and was feasible across diverse European health-care system organisations and settings. Large-scale implementation could help to make drug therapy increasingly safe. Funding: European Union Horizon 2020

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AimThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery.MethodsThis was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin.ResultsOverall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P ConclusionOne in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease