Bladder hyperactivity and increased excitability of bladder afferent neurons associated with reduced expression of Kv1.4 α-subunit in rats with cystitis

Hyperexcitability of C-fiber bladder afferent pathways has been proposed to contribute to urinary frequency and bladder pain in chronic bladder inflammation including interstitial cystitis. However, the detailed mechanisms inducing afferent hyperexcitability after bladder inflammation are not fully understood. Thus, we investigated changes in the properties of bladder afferent neurons in rats with bladder inflammation induced by intravesical application of hydrochloric acid. Eight days after the treatment, bladder function and bladder sensation were analyzed using cystometry and an electrodiagnostic device of sensory function (Neurometer), respectively. Whole cell patch-clamp recordings and immunohistochemical staining were also performed in dissociated bladder afferent neurons identified by a retrograde tracing dye, Fast Blue, injected into the bladder wall. Cystitis rats showed urinary frequency that was inhibited by pretreatment with capsaicin and bladder hyperalgesia mediated by C-fibers. Capsaicin-sensitive bladder afferent neurons from sham rats exhibited high thresholds for spike activation and a phasic firing pattern, whereas those from cystitis rats showed lower thresholds for spike activation and a tonic firing pattern. Transient A-type K+ current density in capsaicin-sensitive bladder afferent neurons was significantly smaller in cystitis rats than in sham rats, although sustained delayed-rectifier K+ current density was not altered after cystitis. The expression of voltage-gated K+ Kv1.4 α-subunits, which can form A-type K+ channels, was reduced in bladder afferent neurons from cystitis rats. These data suggest that bladder inflammation increases bladder afferent neuron excitability by decreasing expression of Kv1.4 α-subunits. Similar changes in capsaicin-sensitive C-fiber afferent terminals may contribute to bladder hyperactivity and hyperalgesia due to acid-induced bladder inflammation

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health