Programmability of Chemical Reaction Networks

Motivated by the intriguing complexity of biochemical circuitry within individual cells we study Stochastic Chemical Reaction Networks (SCRNs), a formal model that considers a set of chemical reactions acting on a finite number of molecules in a well-stirred solution according to standard chemical kinetics equations. SCRNs have been widely used for describing naturally occurring (bio)chemical systems, and with the advent of synthetic biology they become a promising language for the design of artificial biochemical circuits. Our interest here is the computational power of SCRNs and how they relate to more conventional models of computation. We survey known connections and give new connections between SCRNs and Boolean Logic Circuits, Vector Addition Systems, Petri Nets, Gate Implementability, Primitive Recursive Functions, Register Machines, Fractran, and Turing Machines. A theme to these investigations is the thin line between decidable and undecidable questions about SCRN behavior

Clinical trial evidence supporting US Food and Drug Administration approval of novel cancer therapies between 2000 and 2016

Importance: Clinical trial evidence used to support drug approval is typically the only information on benefits and harms that patients and clinicians can use for decision-making when novel cancer therapies become available. Various evaluations have raised concern about the uncertainty surrounding these data, and a systematic investigation of the available information on treatment outcomes for cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warranted. Objective: To describe the clinical trial data available on treatment outcomes at the time of FDA approval of all novel cancer drugs approved for the first time between 2000 and 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study analyzed randomized clinical trials and single-arm clinical trials of novel drugs approved for the first time to treat any type of cancer. Approval packages were obtained from drugs@FDA, a publicly available database containing information on drug and biologic products approved for human use in the US. Data from January 2000 to December 2016 were included in this study. Main Outcomes and Measures: Regulatory and clinical trial characteristics were described. For randomized clinical trials, summary treatment outcomes for overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response across all therapies were calculated, and median absolute survival increases were estimated. Tumor types and regulatory characteristics were assessed separately. Results: Between 2000 and 2016, 92 novel cancer drugs were approved by the FDA for 100 indications based on data from 127 clinical trials. The 127 clinical trials included a median of 191 participants (interquartile range [IQR], 106-448 participants). Overall, 65 clinical trials (51.2%) were randomized, and 95 clinical trials (74.8%) were open label. Of 100 indications, 44 indications underwent accelerated approval, 42 indications were for hematological cancers, and 58 indications were for solid tumors. Novel drugs had mean hazard ratios of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.81; I2 = 46%) for overall survival and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.47-0.57; I2 = 88%) for progression-free survival. The median tumor response, expressed as relative risk, was 2.37 (95% CI, 2.00-2.80; I2 = 91%). The median absolute survival benefit was 2.40 months (IQR, 1.25-3.89 months). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, data available at the time of FDA drug approval indicated that novel cancer therapies were associated with substantial tumor responses but with prolonging median overall survival by only 2.40 months. Approval data from 17 years of clinical trials suggested that patients and clinicians typically had limited information available regarding the benefits of novel cancer treatments at market entry

Modulation of the substrate specificity of the kinase PDK1 by distinct conformations of the full-length protein

The activation of at least 23 different mammalian kinases requires the phosphorylation of their hydrophobic motifs by the kinase PDK1. A linker connects the phosphoinositide-binding PH domain to the catalytic domain, which contains a docking site for substrates called the PIF pocket. Here, we used a chemical biology approach to show that PDK1 existed in equilibrium between at least three distinct conformations with differing substrate specificities. The inositol polyphosphate derivative HYG8 bound to the PH domain and disrupted PDK1 dimerization by stabilizing a monomeric conformation in which the PH domain associated with the catalytic domain and the PIF pocket was accessible. In the absence of lipids, HYG8 potently inhibited the phosphorylation of Akt (also termed PKB) but did not affect the intrinsic activity of PDK1 or the phosphorylation of SGK, which requires docking to the PIF pocket. In contrast, the small molecule valsartan bound to the PIF pocket and stabilized a second distinct monomeric conformation. Our study reveals dynamic conformations of full-length PDK1 in which the location of the linker and the PH domain relative to the catalytic domain determines the selective phosphorylation of PDK1 substrates. The study further suggests new approaches for the design of drugs to selectively modulate signaling downstream of PDK1

Identification of novel loci associated with hip shape:a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies

This study was funded by Arthritis Research UK project grant 20244, which also provided salary funding for DB and CVG. LP works in the MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, a UK MRC‐funded unit (MC_ UU_ 12013/4 & MC_UU_12013/5). ALSPAC: We are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in this study, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole ALSPAC team, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists, and nurses. ALSPAC data collection was supported by the Wellcome Trust (grants WT092830M; WT088806; WT102215/2/13/2), UK Medical Research Council (G1001357), and University of Bristol. The UK Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust (102215/2/13/2) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. Framingham Heart Study: The Framingham Osteoporosis Study is supported by grants from the National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal, and Skin Diseases and the National Institute on Aging (R01 AR41398, R01 AR 061162, R01 AR050066, and R01 AR061445). The analyses reflect intellectual input and resource development from the Framingham Heart Study investigators participating in the SNP Health Association Resource project. The Framingham Heart Study of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health and Boston University School of Medicine were supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Framingham Heart Study (N01‐HC‐25195) and its contract with Affymetrix, Inc., for genotyping services (N02‐HL‐6‐4278). Analyses reflect intellectual input and resource development from the Framingham Heart Study investigators participating in the SNP Health Association Resource (SHARe) project. A portion of this research was conducted using the Linux Cluster for Genetic Analysis (LinGA‐II) funded by the Robert Dawson Evans Endowment of the Department of Medicine at Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center. DK was also supported by Israel Science Foundation grant #1283/14. TDC and DR thank Dr Claire Reardon and the entire Harvard University Bauer Core facility for assistance with ATAC‐seq next generation sequencing. This work was funded in part by the Harvard University Milton Fund, NSF (BCS‐1518596), and NIH NIAMS (1R01AR070139‐01A1) to TDC. MrOS: The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study is supported by National Institutes of Health funding. The following institutes provide support: the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research under the following grant numbers: U01 AG027810, U01 AG042124, U01 AG042139, U01 AG042140, U01 AG042143, U01 AG042145, U01 AG042168, U01 AR066160, and UL1 TR000128. The National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) provides funding for the MrOS ancillary study “Replication of candidate gene associations and bone strength phenotype in MrOS” under the grant number R01 AR051124. The National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) provides funding for the MrOS ancillary study “GWAS in MrOS and SOF” under the grant number RC2 AR058973. SOF: The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) is supported by National Institutes of Health funding. The National Institute on Aging (NIA) provides support under the following grant numbers: R01 AG005407, R01 AR35582, R01 AR35583, R01 AR35584, R01 AG005394, R01 AG027574, and R01 AG027576. TwinsUK: The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust; European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007‐2013). The study also receives support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)‐funded BioResource, Clinical Research Facility, and Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London. SNP genotyping was performed by The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute and National Eye Institute via NIH/CIDR. This study was also supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (project grants 1048216 and 1127156), the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital RAC (SGW), and the iVEC/Pawsey Supercomputing Centre (project grants Pawsey0162 and Director2025 [SGW]). The salary of BHM was supported by a Raine Medical Research Foundation Priming Grant. The Umeå Fracture and Osteoporosis Study (UFO) is supported by the Swedish Research Council (K20006‐72X‐20155013), the Swedish Sports Research Council (87/06), the Swedish Society of Medicine, the Kempe‐Foundation (JCK‐1021), and by grants from the Medical Faculty of Umeå Unviersity (ALFVLL:968:22‐2005, ALFVL:‐937‐2006, ALFVLL:223:11‐2007, and ALFVLL:78151‐2009) and from the county council of Västerbotten (Spjutspetsanslag VLL:159:33‐2007). This publication is the work of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of any funders. None of the funders had any influence on data collection, analysis, interpretation of the results, or writing of the paper. DB will serve as the guarantor of the paper. Authors’ roles: Study conception and design: DAB, JSG, RMA, LP, DK, and JHT. Data collection: DJ, DPK, ESO, SRC, NEL, BHM, FMKW, JBR, SGW, TDC, BGF, DAL, CO, and UP‐L. Data analysis: DAB, DSE, FKK, JSG, FRS, CVG, RJB, RMA, SGW, EG, TDC, DR, and TB. Data interpretation: JSG, RMA, TDC, DR, DME, LP, DK, and JHT. Drafting manuscript: DAB and JHT. Revising manuscript content: JHT. All authors approved the final version of manuscript. DAB takes responsibility for the integrity of the data analysis.Peer reviewedPublisher PD