Health Disparities: Research That Matters.

Health advances have not benefited all people equally. Health equity remains an aspirational goal, but research that enhances health equity is the highest priority at the National Institutes of Health. Here, we propose a call to action and outline current National Institutes of Health programs that aim to eliminate health disparities both broadly and in high priority areas. Discussed topics include stroke as an indicator of broad health inequity, challenges, and opportunities in health disparities research, the need to diversify the research workforce, and the ongoing efforts and struggles to establish trust with disadvantaged communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Current directions in tau research: Highlights from Tau 2020.

Studies supporting a strong association between tau deposition and neuronal loss, neurodegeneration, and cognitive decline have heightened the allure of tau and tau-related mechanisms as therapeutic targets. In February 2020, leading tau experts from around the world convened for the first-ever Tau2020 Global Conference in Washington, DC, co-organized and cosponsored by the Rainwater Charitable Foundation, the Alzheimer's Association, and CurePSP. Representing academia, industry, government, and the philanthropic sector, presenters and attendees discussed recent advances and current directions in tau research. The meeting provided a unique opportunity to move tau research forward by fostering global partnerships among academia, industry, and other stakeholders and by providing support for new drug discovery programs, groundbreaking research, and emerging tau researchers. The meeting also provided an opportunity for experts to present critical research-advancing tools and insights that are now rapidly accelerating the pace of tau research.

The NIH BRAIN Initiative: Advancing neurotechnologies, integrating disciplines.

In 2014, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) began funding an ambitious research program, the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative, with the singular focus of advancing our understanding of brain circuits though development and application of breakthrough neurotechnologies. As we approach the halfway mark of this 10-year effort aimed at revolutionizing our understanding of information processing in the human brain, it is timely to review the progress and the future trajectory of BRAIN Initiative research.

BRAIN Initiative: Cutting-Edge Tools and Resources for the Community.

The overarching goal of the NIH BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies) Initiative is to advance the understanding of healthy and diseased brain circuit function through technological innovation. Core principles for this goal include the validation and dissemination of the myriad innovative technologies, tools, methods, and resources emerging from BRAIN-funded research. Innovators, BRAIN funding agencies, and non-Federal partners are working together to develop strategies for making these products usable, available, and accessible to the scientific community. Here, we describe several early strategies for supporting the dissemination of BRAIN technologies. We aim to invigorate a dialogue with the neuroscience research and funding community, interdisciplinary collaborators, and trainees about the existing and future opportunities for cultivating groundbreaking research products into mature, integrated, and adaptable research systems. Along with the accompanying Society for Neuroscience 2019 Mini-Symposium, "BRAIN Initiative: Cutting-Edge Tools and Resources for the Community," we spotlight the work of several BRAIN investigator teams who are making progress toward providing tools, technologies, and services for the neuroscience community. These tools access neural circuits at multiple levels of analysis, from subcellular composition to brain-wide network connectivity, including the following: integrated systems for EM- and florescence-based connectomics, advances in immunolabeling capabilities, and resources for recording and analyzing functional connectivity. Investigators describe how the resources they provide to the community will contribute to achieving the goals of the NIH BRAIN Initiative. Finally, in addition to celebrating the contributions of these BRAIN-funded investigators, the Mini-Symposium will illustrate the broader diversity of BRAIN Initiative investments in cutting-edge technologies and resources.

The State of the NIH BRAIN Initiative.

The BRAIN Initiative arose from a grand challenge to "accelerate the development and application of new technologies that will enable researchers to produce dynamic pictures of the brain that show how individual brain cells and complex neural circuits interact at the speed of thought." The BRAIN Initiative is a public-private effort focused on the development and use of powerful tools for acquiring fundamental insights about how information processing occurs in the central nervous system (CNS). As the Initiative enters its fifth year, NIH has supported >500 principal investigators, who have answered the Initiative's challenge via hundreds of publications describing novel tools, methods, and discoveries that address the Initiative's seven scientific priorities. We describe scientific advances produced by individual laboratories, multi-investigator teams, and entire consortia that, over the coming decades, will produce more comprehensive and dynamic maps of the brain, deepen our understanding of how circuit activity can produce a rich tapestry of behaviors, and lay the foundation for understanding how its circuitry is disrupted in brain disorders. Much more work remains to bring this vision to fruition, and the National Institutes of Health continues to look to the diverse scientific community, from mathematics, to physics, chemistry, engineering, neuroethics, and neuroscience, to ensure that the greatest scientific benefit arises from this unique research Initiative.

New biomarker for acute ischaemic stroke: plasma glycogen phosphorylase isoenzyme BB.

BACKGROUND: Glycogen phosphorylase is the key enzyme that breaks down glycogen to yield glucose-1-phosphate in order to restore depleted energy stores during cerebral ischaemia. We sought to determine whether plasma levels of glycogen phosphorylase BB (GPBB) isoform increased in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). METHODS: We studied plasma GPBB levels within 12 hours and again at 48±24 hours of symptom onset in 172 patients with imaging-confirmed AIS and 133 stroke-free individuals. We determined the ability of plasma GPBB to discriminate between cases and controls and examined the predictive value of plasma GPBB for 90-day functional outcome, 90-day survival and acute lesion volumes on neuroimaging. RESULTS: The mean (SD) GPBB levels were higher in cases (46.3±38.6 ng/mL at first measurement and 38.6±36.5 ng/mL at second measurement) than in controls (4.1±7.6 ng/mL, p<0.01 for both). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for case-control discrimination based on first GPBB measurement was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98). The sensitivity and specificity based on optimal operating point on the ROC curve (7.0 ng/mL) were both 93%. GPBB levels increased in 90% of patients with punctate infarcts (<1.5 mL) and in all patients admitted within the first 4.5 hours of onset. There was no correlation between GPBB concentration and either clinical outcome or acute infarct volume. CONCLUSION: GPBB demonstrates robust response to acute ischaemia and high sensitivity for small infarcts. If confirmed in more diverse populations that also include stroke mimics, GPBB could find utility as a stand-alone marker for acute brain ischaemia.

A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research.

The US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke convened major stakeholders in June 2012 to discuss how to improve the methodological reporting of animal studies in grant applications and publications. The main workshop recommendation is that at a minimum studies should report on sample-size estimation, whether and how animals were randomized, whether investigators were blind to the treatment, and the handling of data. We recognize that achieving a meaningful improvement in the quality of reporting will require a concerted effort by investigators, reviewers, funding agencies and journal editors. Requiring better reporting of animal studies will raise awareness of the importance of rigorous study design to accelerate scientific progress.

CDC Grand Rounds: Public Health Strategies to Prevent and Treat Strokes.

Worldwide, stroke is the second leading cause of death and a leading cause of serious long-term disability. In the United States, nearly 800,000 strokes occur each year; thus stroke is the fifth leading cause of death overall and the fourth leading cause of death among women (1). Major advances in stroke prevention through treatment of known risk factors has led to stroke being considered largely preventable. For example, in the United States, stroke mortality rates have declined 70% over the past 50 years, in large part because of important reductions in hypertension, tobacco smoking, and more recently, increased use of anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (2,3). Although the reduction in stroke mortality is recognized as one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century (4), gains can still be made. Approximately 80% of strokes could be prevented by screening for and addressing known risks with measures such as improving hypertension control, smoking cessation, diabetes prevention, cholesterol management, increasing use of anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, and eliminating excessive alcohol consumption (5,6).

Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination: A Simple and Accurate Prehospital Scale to Detect Large Vessel Occlusion Strokes.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with large vessel occlusion strokes (LVOS) may be better served by direct transfer to endovascular capable centers avoiding hazardous delays between primary and comprehensive stroke centers. However, accurate stroke field triage remains challenging. We aimed to develop a simple field scale to identify LVOS. METHODS: The Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED) scale was based on items of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) with higher predictive value for LVOS and tested in the Screening Technology and Outcomes Project in Stroke (STOPStroke) cohort, in which patients underwent computed tomographic angiography within the first 24 hours of stroke onset. LVOS were defined by total occlusions involving the intracranial internal carotid artery, middle cerebral artery-M1, middle cerebral artery-2, or basilar arteries. Patients with partial, bihemispheric, and anterior+posterior circulation occlusions were excluded. Receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of FAST-ED were compared with the NIHSS, Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation (RACE) scale, and Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Severity (CPSS) scale. RESULTS: LVO was detected in 240 of the 727 qualifying patients (33%). FAST-ED had comparable accuracy to predict LVO to the NIHSS and higher accuracy than RACE and CPSS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: FAST-ED=0.81 as reference; NIHSS=0.80, P=0.28; RACE=0.77, P=0.02; and CPSS=0.75, P=0.002). A FAST-ED ≥4 had sensitivity of 0.60, specificity of 0.89, positive predictive value of 0.72, and negative predictive value of 0.82 versus RACE ≥5 of 0.55, 0.87, 0.68, and 0.79, and CPSS ≥2 of 0.56, 0.85, 0.65, and 0.78, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: FAST-ED is a simple scale that if successfully validated in the field, it may be used by medical emergency professionals to identify LVOS in the prehospital setting enabling rapid triage of patients.

The Science of Vascular Contributions to Cognitive Impairment and Dementia (VCID): A Framework for Advancing Research Priorities in the Cerebrovascular Biology of Cognitive Decline.

The World Health Organization reports that 47.5 million people are affected by dementia worldwide. With aging populations and 7.7 million new cases each year, the burden of illness due to dementia approaches crisis proportions. Despite significant advances in our understanding of the biology of Alzheimer's disease (AD), the leading dementia diagnosis, the actual causes of dementia in affected individuals are unknown except for rare fully penetrant genetic forms. Evidence from epidemiology and pathology studies indicates that damage to the vascular system is associated with an increased risk of many types of dementia. Both Alzheimer's pathology and cerebrovascular disease increase with age. How AD affects small blood vessel function and how vascular dysfunction contributes to the molecular pathology of Alzheimer's are areas of intense research. The science of vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) integrates diverse aspects of biology and incorporates the roles of multiple cell types that support the function of neural tissue. Because of the proven ability to prevent and treat cardiovascular disease and hypertension with population benefits for heart and stroke outcomes, it is proposed that understanding and targeting the biological mechanisms of VCID can have a similarly positive impact on public health.

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia including Alzheimer's disease.

Scientific evidence continues to demonstrate the linkage of vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia such as Alzheimer's disease. In December, 2013, the Alzheimer's Association, with scientific input from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute from the National Institutes of Health, convened scientific experts to discuss the research gaps in our understanding of how vascular factors contribute to Alzheimer's disease and related dementia. This manuscript summarizes the meeting and the resultant discussion, including an outline of next steps needed to move this area of research forward.

Good outcome rate of 35% in IV-tPA-treated patients with computed tomography angiography confirmed severe anterior circulation occlusive stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To determine the effect of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) on outcomes in patients with severe major anterior circulation ischemic stroke. METHODS: Prospectively, 649 patients with acute stroke had admission National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) scores, noncontrast computed tomography (CT), CT angiography (CTA), and 6-month outcome assessed using modified Rankin scale. IV-tPA treatment decisions were made before CTA, at the time of noncontrast CT scanning, as per routine clinical protocol. Severe symptoms were defined as NIHSS>10. Poor outcome was defined as modified Rankin scale >2. Major occlusions were identified on CTA. Univariate and multivariate stepwise-forward logistic regression analyses of the full cohort were performed. RESULTS: Of 649 patients, 188 (29%) patients presented with NIHSS>10, and 64 out of 188 (34%) patients received IV-tPA. Admission NIHSS, large artery occlusion, and IV-tPA all independently predicted good outcomes; however, a significant interaction existed between IV-tPA and occlusion (P<0.001). Of the patients who presented with NIHSS>10 with anterior circulation occlusion, twice the percentage had good outcomes if they received IV-tPA (17 out of 49 patients, 35%) than if they did not (13 out of 77 patients, 17%; P=0.031). The number needed to treat was 7 (95% confidence interval, 3-60). CONCLUSIONS: IV-tPA treatment resulted in significantly better outcomes in patients with severely symptomatic stroke with major anterior circulation occlusions. The 35% good outcome rate was similar to rates found in endovascular therapy trials. Vascular imaging may help in patient selection and stratification for trials of IV-thrombolytic and endovascular therapies.

Beyond the symptom: the biology of fatigue.

A workshop titled "Beyond the Symptom: The Biology of Fatigue" was held virtually September 27-28, 2021. It was jointly organized by the Sleep Research Society and the Neurobiology of Fatigue Working Group of the NIH Blueprint Neuroscience Research Program. For access to the presentations and video recordings, see: https://neuroscienceblueprint.nih.gov/about/event/beyond-symptom-biology-fatigue. The goals of this workshop were to bring together clinicians and scientists who use a variety of research approaches to understand fatigue in multiple conditions and to identify key gaps in our understanding of the biology of fatigue. This workshop summary distills key issues discussed in this workshop and provides a list of promising directions for future research on this topic. We do not attempt to provide a comprehensive review of the state of our understanding of fatigue, nor to provide a comprehensive reprise of the many excellent presentations. Rather, our goal is to highlight key advances and to focus on questions and future approaches to answering them.