A bacteriophage nucleus-like compartment shields DNA from CRISPR nucleases.

All viruses require strategies to inhibit or evade the immune pathways of cells that they infect. The viruses that infect bacteria, bacteriophages (phages), must avoid immune pathways that target nucleic acids, such as CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems, to replicate efficiently1. Here we show that jumbo phage ΦKZ segregates its DNA from immunity nucleases of its host, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, by constructing a proteinaceous nucleus-like compartment. ΦKZ is resistant to many immunity mechanisms that target DNA in vivo, including two subtypes of CRISPR-Cas3, Cas9, Cas12a and the restriction enzymes HsdRMS and EcoRI. Cas proteins and restriction enzymes are unable to access the phage DNA throughout the infection, but engineering the relocalization of EcoRI inside the compartment enables targeting of the phage and protection of host cells. Moreover, ΦKZ is sensitive to Cas13a-a CRISPR-Cas enzyme that targets RNA-probably owing to phage mRNA localizing to the cytoplasm. Collectively, we propose that Pseudomonas jumbo phages evade a broad spectrum of DNA-targeting nucleases through the assembly of a protein barrier around their genome.

Comparative Risk of Injury with Concurrent Use of Opioids and Skeletal Muscle Relaxants.

Concurrent use of skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs) and opioids has been linked to an increased risk of injury. However, it remains unclear whether the injury risks differ by specific SMR when combined with opioids. We conducted nine retrospective cohort studies within a US Medicaid population. Each cohort consisted exclusively of person-time exposed to both an SMR and one of the three most dispensed opioids-hydrocodone, oxycodone, and tramadol. Opioid users were further divided into three cohorts based on the initiation order of SMRs and opioids-synchronically triggered, opioid-triggered, and SMR-triggered. Within each cohort, we used Cox proportional hazard models to compare the injury rates for different SMRs compared to methocarbamol, adjusting for covariates. We identified 349,543, 139,458, and 218,967 concurrent users of SMRs with hydrocodone, oxycodone, and tramadol, respectively. In the oxycodone-SMR-triggered cohort, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.86 (95% CI, 1.23-2.82) for carisoprodol and 1.73 (1.09-2.73) for tizanidine. In the tramadol-synchronically triggered cohort, the adjusted HRs were 0.69 (0.49-0.97) for metaxalone and 0.62 (0.42-0.90) for tizanidine. In the tramadol-SMR-triggered cohort, the adjusted HRs were 1.51 (1.01-2.26) for baclofen and 1.48 (1.03-2.11) for cyclobenzaprine. All other HRs were statistically nonsignificant. In conclusion, the relative injury rate associated with different SMRs used concurrently with the three most dispensed opioids appears to vary depending on the specific opioid and the order of combination initiation. If confirmed by future studies, clinicians should consider the varying injury rates when prescribing SMRs to individuals using hydrocodone, oxycodone, and tramadol.