Visceral pain – Novel approaches for optogenetic control of spinal afferents

© 2018 Elsevier B.V. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (February 2018) in accordance with the publisher’s archiving policy.Painful stimuli arising within visceral organs are detected by peripheral nerve endings of spinal afferents, whose cell bodies are located in dorsal root ganglia (DRG). Recent technical advances have made it possible to reliably expose and inject single DRG with neuronal tracers or viruses in vivo. This has facilitated, for the first time, unequivocal identification of different types of spinal afferent endings in visceral organs. These technical advances paved the way for a very exciting series of in vivo experiments where individual DRG are injected to facilitate opsin expression (e.g. Archaerhodopsin). Organ-specific expression of opsins in sensory neurons may be achieved by retrograde viral transduction. This means activity of target-specific populations of sensory neurons, within single DRG, can be modulated by optogenetic photo-stimulation. Using this approach we implanted micro light-emitting diodes (micro-LEDs) adjacent to DRG of interest, thereby allowing focal DRG-specific control of visceral and/or somatic afferents in conscious mice. This is vastly different from broad photo-illumination of peripheral nerve endings, which are dispersed over much larger surface areas across an entire visceral organ; and embedded deep within multiple anatomical layers. Focal DRG photo-stimulation also avoids the potential that wide-field illumination of the periphery could inadvertently activate other closely apposed organs, or co-activate different classes of axons in the same organ (e.g. enteric and spinal afferent endings in the gut). It is now possible to selectively control nociceptive and/or non-nociceptive pathways to specific visceral organs in vivo, using wireless optogenetics and micro-LEDs implanted adjacent to DRG, for targeted photo-stimulation

Acute mountain sickness.

Acute mountain sickness (AMS) is a clinical syndrome occurring in otherwise healthy normal individuals who ascend rapidly to high altitude. Symptoms develop over a period ofa few hours or days. The usual symptoms include headache, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, lethargy, unsteadiness of gait, undue dyspnoea on moderate exertion and interrupted sleep. AMS is unrelated to physical fitness, sex or age except that young children over two years of age are unduly susceptible. One of the striking features ofAMS is the wide variation in individual susceptibility which is to some extent consistent. Some subjects never experience symptoms at any altitude while others have repeated attacks on ascending to quite modest altitudes. Rapid ascent to altitudes of 2500 to 3000m will produce symptoms in some subjects while after ascent over 23 days to 5000m most subjects will be affected, some to a marked degree. In general, the more rapid the ascent, the higher the altitude reached and the greater the physical exertion involved, the more severe AMS will be. Ifthe subjects stay at the altitude reached there is a tendency for acclimatization to occur and symptoms to remit over 1-7 days

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Multiancestry analysis of the HLA locus in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases uncovers a shared adaptive immune response mediated by HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes

Across multiancestry groups, we analyzed Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) associations in over 176,000 individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) versus controls. We demonstrate that the two diseases share the same protective association at the HLA locus. HLA-specific fine-mapping showed that hierarchical protective effects of HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes best accounted for the association, strongest with HLA-DRB1*04:04 and HLA-DRB1*04:07, and intermediary with HLA-DRB1*04:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:03. The same signal was associated with decreased neurofibrillary tangles in postmortem brains and was associated with reduced tau levels in cerebrospinal fluid and to a lower extent with increased Aβ42. Protective HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes strongly bound the aggregation-prone tau PHF6 sequence, however only when acetylated at a lysine (K311), a common posttranslational modification central to tau aggregation. An HLA-DRB1*04-mediated adaptive immune response decreases PD and AD risks, potentially by acting against tau, offering the possibility of therapeutic avenues

How far does a whole family approach make a difference: Designing an evaluation framework to enable partners to assess and measure progress

This article reports findings from a study to support the inclusion of a Whole Family Approach (WFA) within policy and provision for children and families conducted in one large northern local authority in England. In recent years mainly from research and good practice elsewhere WFA had been seen to offer opportunities to focus on shared needs, developing strengths and assessing risk factors. The principal aim was to design an evaluation framework to enable partners to assess and measure progress in the delivery of a WF strategy. Methods included individual interviews with professionals and managers (N=22) on knowledge and experience of WFA, for example their understanding of multi-agency work, along with their evidence of adopting a WFA approach. Findings demonstrate the process of how an evaluation framework was constructed based on adapting preexisting outcome-focused ‘models’ used to evaluate functions of partnership-working along with indigenous sources. The fi rst type of ‘model’ entailed a number of dimensions including Vision and Strategy, Partnership Dynamics, Impact and Performance Measurement. The second had two key features: it drew upon the idea of realist evaluation, a paradigm used by practitioner researchers where the focus is upon identifying mechanisms that explain how an action affects outcomes in particular contexts; and the ‘model’ had been applied extensively to an analysis of family intervention projects. What has emerged is an evaluation framework characterised by a number of key ‘signifi ers’ each of which is populated by a series of questions. The framework embraces introducing changes to the culture of planning and delivering services, placing building family strengths at centre-stage

Editorial: Making Research Count

In this issue of Social Work & Social Sciences Review we are pleased to announce a much-welcomed and newly-formed arrangement with the Making Research Count (MRC) network which is based within the Social Care Workforce Research Unit (SCWRU) at King’s College, University of London. An objective of the concordat or agreement is to signify the introduction of a working relationship between MRC and the Review, such that different research interests can be fairly mediated and progressed in order to pursue ideas or topics of mutual concern