Are preliminary week-to-week fluctuations in M1 biased?

Money supply ; Monetary policy

Patterns, predictors, variations, and temporal trends in emergency medical service hospital prenotification for acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND#ENTITYSTARTX02014;: Emergency medical services (EMS) hospital prenotification of an incoming stroke patient is guideline recommended as a means of increasing the timeliness with which stroke patients are evaluated and treated. Still, data are limited with regard to national use of, variations in, and temporal trends in EMS prenotification and associated predictors of its use. METHODS AND RESULTS#ENTITYSTARTX02014;: We examined 371 988 patients with acute ischemic stroke who were transported by EMS and enrolled in 1585 hospitals participating in Get With The Guidelines-Stroke from April 1, 2003, through March 31, 2011. Prenotification occurred in 249 197 EMS-transported patients (67.0%) and varied widely by hospital (range, 0% to 100%). Substantial variations by geographic regions and by state, ranging from 19.7% in Washington, DC, to 93.4% in Montana, also were noted. Patient factors associated with lower use of prenotification included older age, diabetes mellitus, and peripheral vascular disease. Prenotification was less likely for black patients than for white patients (adjusted odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.92-0.97, P<0.0001). Hospital factors associated with greater EMS prenotification use were absence of academic affiliation, higher annual volume of tissue plasminogen activator administration, and geographic location outside the Northeast. Temporal improvements in prenotification rates showed a modest general increase, from 58.0% in 2003 to 67.3% in 2011 (P temporal trend <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS#ENTITYSTARTX02014;: EMS hospital prenotification is guideline recommended, yet among patients transported to Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals it is not provided for 1 in 3 EMS-arriving patients with acute ischemic stroke and varies substantially by hospital, state, and region. These results support the need for enhanced implementation of stroke systems of care. (J Am Heart Assoc. 2012;1:e002345 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.112.002345.)

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone increased pregnancy risk in suckled beef cows not detected in estrus and subjected to a split-time artificial insemination program

Citation: Hill, S. L., Grieger, D. M., Olson, K. C., Jaeger, J. R., Dahlen, C. R., Crosswhite, M. R., . . . Stevenson, J. S. (2016). Gonadotropin-releasing hormone increased pregnancy risk in suckled beef cows not detected in estrus and subjected to a split-time artificial insemination program. Journal of Animal Science, 94(9), 3722-3728. doi:10.2527/jas2016-0582We hypothesized that GnRH would increase pregnancy risk (PR) in a split-time AI program for cows in which estrus was not detected. A total of 1,236 suckled beef cows at 12 locations in 3 states (Colorado, Kansas, and North Dakota) were enrolled. Before applying the fixed-time AI program, BCS was assessed. Cows were treated on d -7 with a progesterone insert concurrent with 100 mu g GnRH and on d 0 with 25 mg PGF(2 alpha) plus removal of the insert. Estrus-detection patches were affixed to cows at insert removal. Estrus was defined to have occurred when an estrus-detection patch was >50% colored (activated). Cows in estrus by 65 h (n = 758; 61.3% of all cows) were randomly allocated to 2 treatments: 1) 100 mu g GnRH and early + GnRH (E+G; n = 373) or 2) AI only at 65 h (early -no GnRH [E-G]; n = 385). The remaining cows were randomly allocated to 2 treatments: 1) 5(L+G; n = 252) or 2) AI only at 84 h (late no GnRH [L-G]; n = 226). Pregnancy was determined 35 d after AI via transrectal ultrasound. Pregnancy risk did not differ (P = 0.68) between E+G and E-G cows (61.9 vs. 60.4%, respectively). Conversely, for cows inseminated at 84 h, PR was greater (P = 0.01) in cows that received GnRH (L+G) compared with their herd mates not receiving GnRH (L-G; 41.7 vs. 30.8%, respectively). Of those cows not detected in estrus by 65 h, 42.1% were detected by 84 h, for a total expression of estrus by all cows of 77.6%. Administration of GnRH increased (P < 0.01) PR in cows not detected in estrus by 84 h (+ GnRH = 33.4% [n = 146] vs. no GnRH = 15.0% [n = 128]) but had no effect in cows expressing estrus by 84 h (+ GnRH = 65.3% [n = 103] vs. no GnRH = 61.7% [n = 97]). Neither estrus expression by 65 or 84 h nor PR was influenced by BCS, parity, or days postpartum at AI. Cows had greater PR when they had been detected in estrus before AI, and PR was improved by administration of GnRH at 65 h after insert removal in cows that were not detected in estrus and inseminated at 84 h

Phenotyping acute and chronic atopic dermatitis-like lesions in Stat6VT mice identifies a role for IL-33 in disease pathogenesis

The Stat6VT mouse model of atopic dermatitis (AD) is induced by T-cell-specific expression of a constitutively active form of the protein signal transducer and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6). Although AD-like lesions are known to develop in Stat6VT mice, this study was designed to determine if these mice develop acute and chronic phases of disease similar to humans. To address this, AD-like lesions from Stat6VT mice were harvested at two different timepoints relative to their onset. Lesions harvested within 1 week after development were defined as acute lesions, and those present for 1 month or more were defined as chronic lesions. Acute and chronic AD-like lesions from Stat6VT mice exhibited histologic findings and cytokine expression patterns similar to acute and chronic AD lesions in humans. Further analysis revealed increased levels of interleukin (IL)-33 transcripts in AD-like lesions compared to Stat6VT nonlesional and wild-type skin controls. Immunofluorescence also revealed increased numbers of IL-33+ keratinocytes in Stat6VT lesional skin and localized IL-33+ keratinocytes to a keratin 5+ subset. Furthermore, AD-like disease was more severe in IL-33-deficient Stat6VT mice compared to IL-33-sufficient Stat6VT mice. These studies suggest that Stat6VT mice can serve as a model of acute and chronic AD and that IL-33 may attenuate inflammation in this system

Control of intestinal stem cell function and proliferation by mitochondrial pyruvate metabolism.

Most differentiated cells convert glucose to pyruvate in the cytosol through glycolysis, followed by pyruvate oxidation in the mitochondria. These processes are linked by the mitochondrial pyruvate carrier (MPC), which is required for efficient mitochondrial pyruvate uptake. In contrast, proliferative cells, including many cancer and stem cells, perform glycolysis robustly but limit fractional mitochondrial pyruvate oxidation. We sought to understand the role this transition from glycolysis to pyruvate oxidation plays in stem cell maintenance and differentiation. Loss of the MPC in Lgr5-EGFP-positive stem cells, or treatment of intestinal organoids with an MPC inhibitor, increases proliferation and expands the stem cell compartment. Similarly, genetic deletion of the MPC in Drosophila intestinal stem cells also increases proliferation, whereas MPC overexpression suppresses stem cell proliferation. These data demonstrate that limiting mitochondrial pyruvate metabolism is necessary and sufficient to maintain the proliferation of intestinal stem cells

Lower extremity compartment syndrome in the acute care surgery paradigm: safety lessons learned

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Canvass: a crowd-sourced, natural-product screening library for exploring biological space

NCATS thanks Dingyin Tao for assistance with compound characterization. This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIH). R.B.A. acknowledges support from NSF (CHE-1665145) and NIH (GM126221). M.K.B. acknowledges support from NIH (5R01GM110131). N.Z.B. thanks support from NIGMS, NIH (R01GM114061). J.K.C. acknowledges support from NSF (CHE-1665331). J.C. acknowledges support from the Fogarty International Center, NIH (TW009872). P.A.C. acknowledges support from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), NIH (R01 CA158275), and the NIH/National Institute of Aging (P01 AG012411). N.K.G. acknowledges support from NSF (CHE-1464898). B.C.G. thanks the support of NSF (RUI: 213569), the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, and the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation. C.C.H. thanks the start-up funds from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography for support. J.N.J. acknowledges support from NIH (GM 063557, GM 084333). A.D.K. thanks the support from NCI, NIH (P01CA125066). D.G.I.K. acknowledges support from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (1 R01 AT008088) and the Fogarty International Center, NIH (U01 TW00313), and gratefully acknowledges courtesies extended by the Government of Madagascar (Ministere des Eaux et Forets). O.K. thanks NIH (R01GM071779) for financial support. T.J.M. acknowledges support from NIH (GM116952). S.M. acknowledges support from NIH (DA045884-01, DA046487-01, AA026949-01), the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs through the Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program (W81XWH-17-1-0256), and NCI, NIH, through a Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA008748). K.N.M. thanks the California Department of Food and Agriculture Pierce's Disease and Glassy Winged Sharpshooter Board for support. B.T.M. thanks Michael Mullowney for his contribution in the isolation, elucidation, and submission of the compounds in this work. P.N. acknowledges support from NIH (R01 GM111476). L.E.O. acknowledges support from NIH (R01-HL25854, R01-GM30859, R0-1-NS-12389). L.E.B., J.K.S., and J.A.P. thank the NIH (R35 GM-118173, R24 GM-111625) for research support. F.R. thanks the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC) for financial support. I.S. thanks the University of Oklahoma Startup funds for support. J.T.S. acknowledges support from ACS PRF (53767-ND1) and NSF (CHE-1414298), and thanks Drs. Kellan N. Lamb and Michael J. Di Maso for their synthetic contribution. B.S. acknowledges support from NIH (CA78747, CA106150, GM114353, GM115575). W.S. acknowledges support from NIGMS, NIH (R15GM116032, P30 GM103450), and thanks the University of Arkansas for startup funds and the Arkansas Biosciences Institute (ABI) for seed money. C.R.J.S. acknowledges support from NIH (R01GM121656). D.S.T. thanks the support of NIH (T32 CA062948-Gudas) and PhRMA Foundation to A.L.V., NIH (P41 GM076267) to D.S.T., and CCSG NIH (P30 CA008748) to C.B. Thompson. R.E.T. acknowledges support from NIGMS, NIH (GM129465). R.J.T. thanks the American Cancer Society (RSG-12-253-01-CDD) and NSF (CHE1361173) for support. D.A.V. thanks the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, the National Science Foundation (CHE-0353662, CHE-1005253, and CHE-1725142), the Beckman Foundation, the Sherman Fairchild Foundation, the John Stauffer Charitable Trust, and the Christian Scholars Foundation for support. J.W. acknowledges support from the American Cancer Society through the Research Scholar Grant (RSG-13-011-01-CDD). W.M.W.acknowledges support from NIGMS, NIH (GM119426), and NSF (CHE1755698). A.Z. acknowledges support from NSF (CHE-1463819). (Intramural Research Program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIH); CHE-1665145 - NSF; CHE-1665331 - NSF; CHE-1464898 - NSF; RUI: 213569 - NSF; CHE-1414298 - NSF; CHE1361173 - NSF; CHE1755698 - NSF; CHE-1463819 - NSF; GM126221 - NIH; 5R01GM110131 - NIH; GM 063557 - NIH; GM 084333 - NIH; R01GM071779 - NIH; GM116952 - NIH; DA045884-01 - NIH; DA046487-01 - NIH; AA026949-01 - NIH; R01 GM111476 - NIH; R01-HL25854 - NIH; R01-GM30859 - NIH; R0-1-NS-12389 - NIH; R35 GM-118173 - NIH; R24 GM-111625 - NIH; CA78747 - NIH; CA106150 - NIH; GM114353 - NIH; GM115575 - NIH; R01GM121656 - NIH; T32 CA062948-Gudas - NIH; P41 GM076267 - NIH; R01GM114061 - NIGMS, NIH; R15GM116032 - NIGMS, NIH; P30 GM103450 - NIGMS, NIH; GM129465 - NIGMS, NIH; GM119426 - NIGMS, NIH; TW009872 - Fogarty International Center, NIH; U01 TW00313 - Fogarty International Center, NIH; R01 CA158275 - National Cancer Institute (NCI), NIH; P01 AG012411 - NIH/National Institute of Aging; Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation; Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation; Scripps Institution of Oceanography; P01CA125066 - NCI, NIH; 1 R01 AT008088 - National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health; W81XWH-17-1-0256 - Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs through the Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program; P30 CA008748 - NCI, NIH, through a Cancer Center Support Grant; California Department of Food and Agriculture Pierce's Disease and Glassy Winged Sharpshooter Board; American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC); University of Oklahoma Startup funds; 53767-ND1 - ACS PRF; PhRMA Foundation; P30 CA008748 - CCSG NIH; RSG-12-253-01-CDD - American Cancer Society; RSG-13-011-01-CDD - American Cancer Society; CHE-0353662 - National Science Foundation; CHE-1005253 - National Science Foundation; CHE-1725142 - National Science Foundation; Beckman Foundation; Sherman Fairchild Foundation; John Stauffer Charitable Trust; Christian Scholars Foundation)Published versionSupporting documentatio

The role of steroids in the management of brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline

Do steroids improve neurologic symptoms in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared to no treatment? If steroids are given, what dose should be used? Comparisons include: (1) steroid therapy versus none. (2) comparison of different doses of steroid therapy. Target population These recommendations apply to adults diagnosed with brain metastases. Recommendations Steroid therapy versus no steroid therapy Asymptomatic brain metastases patients without mass effect Insufficient evidence exists to make a treatment recommendation for this clinical scenario. Brain metastases patients with mild symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. It is recommended for patients who are symptomatic from metastatic disease to the brain that a starting dose of 4–8 mg/day of dexamethasone be considered. Brain metastases patients with moderate to severe symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. If patients exhibit severe symptoms consistent with increased intracranial pressure, it is recommended that higher doses such as 16 mg/day or more be considered. Choice of Steroid Level 3 If corticosteroids are given, dexamethasone is the best drug choice given the available evidence. Duration of Corticosteroid Administration Level 3 Corticosteroids, if given, should be tapered slowly over a 2 week time period, or longer in symptomatic patients, based upon an individualized treatment regimen and a full understanding of the long-term sequelae of corticosteroid therapy. Given the very limited number of studies (two) which met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, these are the only recommendations that can be offered based on this methodology. Please see “Discussion” and “Summary” section for additional details

Engineering the Petawatt Laser into Nova

The engineering process of integrating the Petawatt (10{sup 15} watts) laser system into the existing 30 kJ (UV) Nova laser at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is described in detail. The nanosecond-long, chirped Petawatt laser pulse is initially generated in a separate master oscillator room and then injected into one of Nova`s 10 beamlines. There, the pulse is further amplified and enlarged to {approximately}{phi}60 cm, temporally compressed under vacuum to <500 fs using large diameter diffraction gratings, and then finally focused onto targets using a parabolic mirror. The major Petawatt components are physically large which created many significant engineering challenges in design, installation and implementation. These include the diffraction gratings and mirrors, vacuum compressor chamber, target chamber, and parabolic focusing mirror. Other Petawatt system components were also technically challenging and include: an injection beamline, transport spatial filters, laser diagnostics, alignment components, motor controls, interlocks, timing and synchronization systems, support structures, and vacuum systems. The entire Petawatt laser system was designed, fabricated, installed, and activated while the Nova laser continued its normal two-shift operation. This process required careful engineering and detailed planning to prevent experimental downtime and to complete the project on schedule