On positivity of Ehrhart polynomials

Ehrhart discovered that the function that counts the number of lattice points in dilations of an integral polytope is a polynomial. We call the coefficients of this polynomial Ehrhart coefficients, and say a polytope is Ehrhart positive if all Ehrhart coefficients are positive (which is not true for all integral polytopes). The main purpose of this article is to survey interesting families of polytopes that are known to be Ehrhart positive and discuss the reasons from which their Ehrhart positivity follows. We also include examples of polytopes that have negative Ehrhart coefficients and polytopes that are conjectured to be Ehrhart positive, as well as pose a few relevant questions.Comment: 40 pages, 7 figures. To appear in in Recent Trends in Algebraic Combinatorics, a volume of the Association for Women in Mathematics Series, Springer International Publishin

Adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics versus placebo for any indication

BACKGROUND: Macrolide antibiotics (macrolides) are among the most commonly prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are used for a wide range of infections. However, macrolides also expose people to the risk of adverse events. The current understanding of adverse events is mostly derived from observational studies, which are subject to bias because it is hard to distinguish events caused by antibiotics from events caused by the diseases being treated. Because adverse events are treatment-specific, rather than disease-specific, it is possible to increase the number of adverse events available for analysis by combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the same treatment across different diseases. OBJECTIVES:To quantify the incidences of reported adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics compared to placebo for any indication. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register (2018, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid, from 1946 to 8 May 2018); Embase (from 2010 to 8 May 2018); CINAHL (from 1981 to 8 May 2018); LILACS (from 1982 to 8 May 2018); and Web of Science (from 1955 to 8 May 2018). We searched clinical trial registries for current and completed trials (9 May 2018) and checked the reference lists of included studies and of previous Cochrane Reviews on macrolides. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs that compared a macrolide antibiotic to placebo for any indication. We included trials using any of the four most commonly used macrolide antibiotics: azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, or roxithromycin. Macrolides could be administered by any route. Concomitant medications were permitted provided they were equally available to both treatment and comparison groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included studies and the quality of evidence for each outcome of interest. We analysed specific adverse events, deaths, and subsequent carriage of macrolide-resistant bacteria separately. The study participant was the unit of analysis for each adverse event. Any specific adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of any group were reported. We undertook a meta-analysis when three or more included studies reported a specific adverse event. MAIN RESULTS: We included 183 studies with a total of 252,886 participants (range 40 to 190,238). The indications for macrolide antibiotics varied greatly, with most studies using macrolides for the treatment or prevention of either acute respiratory tract infections, cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, gastrointestinal conditions, or urogynaecological problems. Most trials were conducted in secondary care settings. Azithromycin and erythromycin were more commonly studied than clarithromycin and roxithromycin.Most studies (89%) reported some adverse events or at least stated that no adverse events were observed.Gastrointestinal adverse events were the most commonly reported type of adverse event. Compared to placebo, macrolides caused more diarrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.16; low-quality evidence); more abdominal pain (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.26; low-quality evidence); and more nausea (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.90; moderate-quality evidence). Vomiting (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.56; moderate-quality evidence) and gastrointestinal disorders not otherwise specified (NOS) (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.00; moderate-quality evidence) were also reported more often in participants taking macrolides compared to placebo.The number of additional people (absolute difference in risk) who experienced adverse events from macrolides was: gastrointestinal disorders NOS 85/1000; diarrhoea 72/1000; abdominal pain 62/1000; nausea 47/1000; and vomiting 23/1000.The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) ranged from 12 (95% CI 8 to 23) for gastrointestinal disorders NOS to 17 (9 to 47) for abdominal pain; 19 (12 to 33) for diarrhoea; 19 (13 to 30) for nausea; and 45 (22 to 295) for vomiting.There was no clear consistent difference in gastrointestinal adverse events between different types of macrolides or route of administration.Taste disturbances were reported more often by participants taking macrolide antibiotics, although there were wide confidence intervals and moderate heterogeneity (OR 4.95, 95% CI 1.64 to 14.93; Iand#178; = 46%; low-quality evidence).Compared with participants taking placebo, those taking macrolides experienced hearing loss more often, however only four studies reported this outcome (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70; Iand#178; = 0%; low-quality evidence).We did not find any evidence that macrolides caused more cardiac disorders (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; very low-quality evidence); hepatobiliary disorders (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.09; very low-quality evidence); or changes in liver enzymes (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.37; very low-quality evidence) compared to placebo.We did not find any evidence that appetite loss, dizziness, headache, respiratory symptoms, blood infections, skin and soft tissue infections, itching, or rashes were reported more often by participants treated with macrolides compared to placebo.Macrolides caused less cough (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo, probably because these are not adverse events, but rather characteristics of the indications for the antibiotics. Less fever (OR 0.73, 95% 0.54 to 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) was also reported by participants taking macrolides compared to placebo, although these findings were non-significant.There was no increase in mortality in participants taking macrolides compared with placebo (OR 0.96, 95% 0.87 to 1.06; Iand#178; = 11%; low-quality evidence).Only 24 studies (13%) provided useful data on macrolide-resistant bacteria. Macrolide-resistant bacteria were more commonly identified among participants immediately after exposure to the antibiotic. However, differences in resistance thereafter were inconsistent.Pharmaceutical companies supplied the trial medication or funding, or both, for 91 trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The macrolides as a group clearly increased rates of gastrointestinal adverse events. Most trials made at least some statement about adverse events, such as "none were observed". However, few trials clearly listed adverse events as outcomes, reported on the methods used for eliciting adverse events, or even detailed the numbers of people who experienced adverse events in both the intervention and placebo group. This was especially true for the adverse event of bacterial resistance.</p

Dlk1 Is Necessary for Proper Skeletal Muscle Development and Regeneration

Delta-like 1homolog (Dlk1) is an imprinted gene encoding a transmembrane protein whose increased expression has been associated with muscle hypertrophy in animal models. However, the mechanisms by which Dlk1 regulates skeletal muscle plasticity remain unknown. Here we combine conditional gene knockout and over-expression analyses to investigate the role of Dlk1 in mouse muscle development, regeneration and myogenic stem cells (satellite cells). Genetic ablation of Dlk1 in the myogenic lineage resulted in reduced body weight and skeletal muscle mass due to reductions in myofiber numbers and myosin heavy chain IIB gene expression. In addition, muscle-specific Dlk1 ablation led to postnatal growth retardation and impaired muscle regeneration, associated with augmented myogenic inhibitory signaling mediated by NF-κB and inflammatory cytokines. To examine the role of Dlk1 in satellite cells, we analyzed the proliferation, self-renewal and differentiation of satellite cells cultured on their native host myofibers. We showed that ablation of Dlk1 inhibits the expression of the myogenic regulatory transcription factor MyoD, and facilitated the self-renewal of activated satellite cells. Conversely, Dlk1 over-expression inhibited the proliferation and enhanced differentiation of cultured myoblasts. As Dlk1 is expressed at low levels in satellite cells but its expression rapidly increases upon myogenic differentiation in vitro and in regenerating muscles in vivo, our results suggest a model in which Dlk1 expressed by nascent or regenerating myofibers non-cell autonomously promotes the differentiation of their neighbor satellite cells and therefore leads to muscle hypertrophy

Body Parts Correlates to a Hundred Early-Learned Verbs

We commonly believe that verbs are about action, but are they also about body parts? We kiss with our lips, kick with our legs, and think with our heads. Our question is whether children systematically associate verbs to specific body parts. So far, theoretically, the original components of verbs include: contact, path, goal, source, state of mind, and manner (Kemerer, 2008). Our study adds the component of body parts. Sixty children were tested, 20 verbs at a time, with a total of 102 verbs. They were asked which body part they use with a given verb. The results indicate that 91 verbs out if 102 (86.6%) were related to one body region by 50% of the participants. Further, a correspondence analysis (a dimension reduction technique) showed that children systematically associate verbs with five main body regions: hands (55% of the verbs), legs (13%), mouth (14%), eye (6%), and ear (2%) and these correspond to the exact same regions proposed by adults from a previous study

A heme fusion tag for protein affinity purification and quantification

We report a novel affinity-based purification method for proteins expressed in Escherichia coli that uses the coordination of a heme tag to an l-histidine-immobilized sepharose (HIS) resin. This approach provides an affinity purification tag visible to the eye, facilitating tracking of the protein. We show that azurin and maltose binding protein are readily purified from cell lysate using the heme tag and HIS resin. Mild conditions are used; heme-tagged proteins are bound to the HIS resin in phosphate buffer, pH 7.0, and eluted by adding 200–500 mM imidazole or binding buffer at pH 5 or 8. The HIS resin exhibits a low level of nonspecific binding of untagged cellular proteins for the systems studied here. An additional advantage of the heme tag-HIS method for purification is that the heme tag can be used for protein quantification by using the pyridine hemochrome absorbance method for heme concentration determination

SNAP dendrimers: multivalent protein display on dendrimer-like DNA for directed evolution

Display systems connect a protein with the DNA encoding it. Such systems (e.g., phage or ribosome display) have found widespread application in the directed evolution of protein binders and constitute a key element of the biotechnological toolkit. In this proof-of-concept study we describe the construction of a system that allows the display of multiple copies of a protein of interest in order to take advantage of avidity effects during affinity panning. To this end, dendrimer-like DNA is used as a scaffold with docking points that can join the coding DNA with multiple protein copies. Each DNA construct is compartmentalised in water-in-oil emulsion droplets. The corresponding protein is expressed, in vitro, inside the droplets as a SNAP-tag fusion. The covalent bond between DNA and the SNAP-tag is created by reaction with dendrimer-bound benzylguanine (BG). The ability to form dendrimer-like DNA straightforwardly from oligonucleotides bearing BG allowed the comparison of a series of templates differing in size, valency and position of BG. In model selections the most efficient constructs show recoveries of up to 0.86% and up to 400-fold enrichments. The comparison of mono- and multivalent constructs suggests that the avidity effect enhances enrichment by up to fivefold and recovery by up to 25-fold. Our data establish a multivalent format for SNAP-display based on dendrimer-like DNA as the first in vitro display system with defined tailor-made valencies and explore a new application for DNA nanostructures. These data suggest that multivalent SNAP dendrimers have the potential to facilitate the selection of protein binders especially during early rounds of directed evolution, allowing a larger diversity of candidate binders to be recovered