Human single-nucleotide polymorphisms alter p53 sequence-specific binding at gene regulatory elements

p53 coordinates the expression of an intricate network of genes in response to stress signals. Sequence-specific DNA binding is essential for p53-mediated tumor suppression. We evaluated the impact of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in p53 response elements (p53RE) on DNA binding and gene expression in response to DNA damage. Using a bioinformatics approach based on incorporating p53 binding strength into a position weight matrix, we selected 32 SNPs in putative and validated p53REs. The microsphere assay for protein–DNA binding (MAPD) and allele-specific expression analysis was employed to assess the impact of SNPs on p53-DNA binding and gene expression, respectively. Comparing activated p53 binding in nuclear extracts from doxorubicin- or ionizing radiation (IR)-treated human cells, we observed little difference in binding profiles. Significant p53 binding was observed for most polymorphic REs and several displayed binding comparable to the p21 RE. SNP alleles predicted to lower p53 binding indeed reduced binding in 25 of the 32 sequences. Chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing in lymphoblastoid cells confirmed p53 binding to seven polymorphic p53 REs in response to doxorubicin. In addition, five polymorphisms were associated with altered gene expression following doxorubicin treatment. Our findings demonstrate an effective strategy to identify and evaluate SNPs that may alter p53-mediated stress responses

Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in COVID-19.

Host-mediated lung inflammation is present1, and drives mortality2, in the critical illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Host genetic variants associated with critical illness may identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic development3. Here we report the results of the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality In Critical Care) genome-wide association study in 2,244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 from 208 UK intensive care units. We have identified and replicated the following new genome-wide significant associations: on chromosome 12q24.13 (rs10735079, P = 1.65 × 10-8) in a gene cluster that encodes antiviral restriction enzyme activators (OAS1, OAS2 and OAS3); on chromosome 19p13.2 (rs74956615, P = 2.3 × 10-8) near the gene that encodes tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2); on chromosome 19p13.3 (rs2109069, P = 3.98 ×  10-12) within the gene that encodes dipeptidyl peptidase 9 (DPP9); and on chromosome 21q22.1 (rs2236757, P = 4.99 × 10-8) in the interferon receptor gene IFNAR2. We identified potential targets for repurposing of licensed medications: using Mendelian randomization, we found evidence that low expression of IFNAR2, or high expression of TYK2, are associated with life-threatening disease; and transcriptome-wide association in lung tissue revealed that high expression of the monocyte-macrophage chemotactic receptor CCR2 is associated with severe COVID-19. Our results identify robust genetic signals relating to key host antiviral defence mechanisms and mediators of inflammatory organ damage in COVID-19. Both mechanisms may be amenable to targeted treatment with existing drugs. However, large-scale randomized clinical trials will be essential before any change to clinical practice

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Additional file 1 of Impact of an outdoor loose parts play intervention on Nova Scotian preschoolers’ physical literacy: a mixed-methods randomized controlled trial

Additional file 1

Body mass index and health-related quality of life among young Swiss men

BACKGROUND: Studies about the association between body mass index (BMI) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are often limited, because they 1) did not include a broad range of health-risk behaviors as covariates; 2) relied on clinical samples, which might lead to biased results; and 3) did not incorporate underweight individuals. Hence, this study aims to examine associations between BMI (from being underweight through obesity) and HRQOL in a population-based sample, while considering multiple health-risk behaviors (low physical activity, risky alcohol consumption, daily cigarette smoking, frequent cannabis use) as well as socio-demographic characteristics. METHODS: A total of 5 387 young Swiss men (mean age = 19.99; standard deviation = 1.24) of a cross-sectional population-based study were included. BMI was calculated (kg/m2) based on self-reported height and weight and divided into 'underweight' (=30.0). Mental and physical HRQOL was assessed via the SF-12v2. Self-reported information on physical activity, substance use (alcohol, cigarettes, and cannabis) and socio-demographic characteristics also was collected. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to study the associations between BMI categories and below average mental or physical HRQOL. Substance use variables and socio-demographic variables were used as covariates. RESULTS: Altogether, 76.3 % were normal weight, whereas 3.3 % were underweight, 16.5 % overweight and 3.9 % obese. Being overweight or obese was associated with reduced physical HRQOL (adjusted OR [95 % CI] = 1.58 [1.18-2.13] and 2.45 [1.57-3.83], respectively), whereas being underweight predicted reduced mental HRQOL (adjusted OR [95 % CI] = 1.49 [1.08-2.05]). Surprisingly, obesity decreased the likelihood of experiencing below average mental HRQOL (adjusted OR [95 % CI] = 0.66 [0.46-0.94]). Besides BMI, expressed as a categorical variable, all health-risk behaviors and socio-demographic variables were associated with reduced physical and/or mental HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS: Deviations from normal weight are, even after controlling for important health-risk behaviors and socio-demographic characteristics, associated with compromised physical or mental HRQOL among young men. Hence, preventive programs should aim to preserve or re-establish normal weight. The self-appraised positive mental well-being of obese men noted here, which possibly reflects a response shift, might complicate such efforts