S1 basic leucine zipper transcription factors shape plant architecture by controlling C/N partitioning to apical and lateral organs.

Plants tightly control growth of their lateral organs, which led to the concept of apical dominance. However, outgrowth of the dormant lateral primordia is sensitive to the plant's nutritional status, resulting in an immense plasticity in plant architecture. While the impact of hormonal regulation on apical dominance is well characterized, the prime importance of sugar signaling to unleash lateral organ formation has just recently emerged. Here, we aimed to identify transcriptional regulators, which control the trade-off between growth of apical versus lateral organs. Making use of locally inducible gain-of-function as well as single and higher-order loss-of-function approaches of the sugar-responsive S1-basic-leucine-zipper (S1-bZIP) transcription factors, we disclosed their largely redundant function in establishing apical growth dominance. Consistently, comprehensive phenotypical and analytical studies of S1-bZIP mutants show a clear shift of sugar and organic nitrogen (N) allocation from apical to lateral organs, coinciding with strong lateral organ outgrowth. Tissue-specific transcriptomics reveal specific clade III SWEET sugar transporters, crucial for long-distance sugar transport to apical sinks and the glutaminase GLUTAMINE AMIDO-TRANSFERASE 1_2.1, involved in N homeostasis, as direct S1-bZIP targets, linking the architectural and metabolic mutant phenotypes to downstream gene regulation. Based on these results, we propose that S1-bZIPs control carbohydrate (C) partitioning from source leaves to apical organs and tune systemic N supply to restrict lateral organ formation by C/N depletion. Knowledge of the underlying mechanisms controlling plant C/N partitioning is of pivotal importance for breeding strategies to generate plants with desired architectural and nutritional characteristics.

Resilience and Mental-Health Symptoms in ICU Healthcare Professionals Facing Repeated COVID-19 Waves.

Rationale: Psychological resilience (the ability to thrive in adversity) may protect against mental-health symptoms in healthcare professionals during coronavirus disease (COVID-19) waves. Objectives: To identify determinants of resilience in ICU staff members. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey in 21 French ICUs, staff members completed the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Impact of Event Scale-Revised (for post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]). Factors independently associated with resilience were identified. Measurements and Main Results: The response rate was 73.1% (950 of 1,300). The median 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale score was 29 (interquartile range, 25-32). Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and PTSD were present in 61%, 39%, and 36% of staff members, respectively. Distress associated with the COVID-19 infodemic was correlated with symptoms of depression and PTSD. More resilient respondents less often had symptoms of anxiety, depression, and PTSD. Greater resilience was independently associated with male sex, having provided intensive care during the early waves, having managed more than 50 patients with COVID-19, and, compared with earlier waves, working longer hours, having greater motivation, and more often involving families in end-of-life decisions. Independent risk factors for lower resilience were having managed more than 10 patients who died of COVID-19, having felt frightened or isolated, and greater distress from the COVID-19 infodemic. Conclusions: This study identifies modifiable determinants of resilience among ICU staff members. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether prior resilience decreases the risk of mental ill health during subsequent challenges. Hospital and ICU managers, for whom preserving mental well-being among staff members is a key duty, should pay careful attention to resilience.

Presentation, management, and outcomes of older compared to younger adults with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit: a multicenter cohort study.

PURPOSE: Older adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) usually have fair baseline functional capacity, yet their age and frailty may compromise their management. We compared the characteristics and management of older (≥ 75 years) versus younger adults hospitalized in ICU with hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (HA-BSI). METHODS: Nested cohort study within the EUROBACT-2 database, a multinational prospective cohort study including adults (≥ 18 years) hospitalized in the ICU during 2019-2021. We compared older versus younger adults in terms of infection characteristics (clinical signs and symptoms, source, and microbiological data), management (imaging, source control, antimicrobial therapy), and outcomes (28-day mortality and hospital discharge). RESULTS: Among 2111 individuals hospitalized in 219 ICUs with HA-BSI, 563 (27%) were ≥ 75 years old. Compared to younger patients, these individuals had higher comorbidity score and lower functional capacity; presented more often with a pulmonary, urinary, or unknown HA-BSI source; and had lower heart rate, blood pressure and temperature at presentation. Pathogens and resistance rates were similar in both groups. Differences in management included mainly lower rates of effective source control achievement among aged individuals. Older adults also had significantly higher day-28 mortality (50% versus 34%, p < 0.001), and lower rates of discharge from hospital (12% versus 20%, p < 0.001) by this time. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with HA-BSI hospitalized in ICU have different baseline characteristics and source of infection compared to younger patients. Management of older adults differs mainly by lower probability to achieve source control. This should be targeted to improve outcomes among older ICU patients.

Single-drug versus combination antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia due to Gram-negative pathogens: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

KEY MESSAGES: In this study including 391 critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia due to Gram-negative pathogens, combination therapy was not associated with a reduced hazard of death at Day 28 or a greater likelihood of clinical cure at Day 14. No over-risk of AKI was observed in patients receiving combination therapy. BACKGROUND: The benefits and harms of combination antimicrobial therapy remain controversial in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), ventilated HAP (vHAP) or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) involving Gram-negative bacteria. METHODS: We included all patients in the prospective multicenter OutcomeRea database with a first HAP, vHAP or VAP due to a single Gram-negative bacterium and treated with initial adequate single-drug or combination therapy. The primary endpoint was Day-28 all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were clinical cure rate at Day 14 and a composite outcome of death or treatment-emergent acute kidney injury (AKI) at Day 7. The average effects of combination therapy on the study endpoints were investigated through inverse probability of treatment-weighted regression and multivariable regression models. Subgroups analyses were performed according to the resistance phenotype of the causative pathogens (multidrug-resistant or not), the pivotal (carbapenems or others) and companion (aminoglycosides/polymyxins or others) drug classes, the duration of combination therapy (< 3 or ≥ 3 days), the SOFA score value at pneumonia onset (< 7 or ≥ 7 points), and in patients with pneumonia due to non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria, pneumonia-related bloodstream infection, or septic shock. RESULTS: Among the 391 included patients, 151 (38.6%) received single-drug therapy and 240 (61.4%) received combination therapy. VAP (overall, 67.3%), vHAP (16.4%) and HAP (16.4%) were equally distributed in the two groups. All-cause mortality rates at Day 28 (overall, 31.2%), clinical cure rate at Day 14 (43.7%) and the rate of death or AKI at Day 7 (41.2%) did not significantly differ between the groups. In inverse probability of treatment-weighted analyses, combination therapy was not independently associated with the likelihood of all-cause death at Day 28 (adjusted odd ratio [aOR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.77; P = 0.56), clinical cure at Day 14 (aOR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.53-1.20; P = 0.27) or death or AKI at Day 7 (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI 0.71-1.63; P = 0.73). Multivariable regression models and subgroup analyses provided similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Initial combination therapy exerts no independent impact on Day-28 mortality, clinical cure rate at Day 14, and the hazard of death or AKI at Day 7 in critically ill patients with mono-bacterial HAP, vHAP or VAP due to Gram-negative bacteria.

The role of centre and country factors on process and outcome indicators in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the associations between centre/country-based factors and two important process and outcome indicators in patients with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSI). METHODS: We used data on HABSI from the prospective EUROBACT-2 study to evaluate the associations between centre/country factors on a process or an outcome indicator: adequacy of antimicrobial therapy within the first 24 h or 28-day mortality, respectively. Mixed logistical models with clustering by centre identified factors associated with both indicators. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred nine patients from two hundred one intensive care units (ICUs) were included in forty-seven countries. Overall, 51% (n = 1128) of patients received an adequate antimicrobial therapy and the 28-day mortality was 38% (n = 839). The availability of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for aminoglycosides everyday [odds ratio (OR) 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-2.14] or within a few hours (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.34-2.38), surveillance cultures for multidrug-resistant organism carriage performed weekly (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.09-1.93), and increasing Human Development Index (HDI) values were associated with adequate antimicrobial therapy. The presence of intermediate care beds (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84), TDM for aminoglycoside available everyday (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-1.00) or within a few hours (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.70), 24/7 consultation of clinical pharmacists (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.95), percentage of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) between 10% and 25% in the ICU (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.00-2.80), and decreasing HDI values were associated with 28-day mortality. CONCLUSION: Centre/country factors should be targeted for future interventions to improve management strategies and outcome of HABSI in ICU patients.

Hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in critically ill cirrhotic patients: a post-hoc analysis of the EUROBACT-2 international cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired bloodstream infections are common in the intensive care unit (ICU) and have a high mortality rate. Patients with cirrhosis are especially susceptible to infections, yet there is a knowledge gap in the epidemiological distinctions in hospital-acquired bloodstream infections between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients in the ICU. It has been suggested that cirrhotic patients, present a trend towards more gram-positive infections, and especially enterococcal infections. This study aims to describe epidemiological differences in hospital-acquired bloodstream infections between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients hospitalized in the ICU regarding infection sources, microorganisms and mortality. METHODS: Using prospective Eurobact-2 international cohort study data, we compared hospital-acquired bloodstream infections sources and microorganisms in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients. The association between Enterococcus faecium and cirrhosis was studied using a multivariable mixed logistic regression. The association between cirrhosis and mortality was assessed by a multivariable frailty Cox model. RESULTS: Among the 1059 hospital-acquired bloodstream infections patients included from 101 centers, 160 had cirrhosis. Hospital-acquired bloodstream infection source in cirrhotic patients was primarily abdominal (35.6%), while it was pulmonary (18.9%) for non-cirrhotic (p < 0.01). Gram-positive hospital-acquired bloodstream infections accounted for 42.3% in cirrhotic patients compared to 33.2% in non-cirrhotic patients (p = 0.02). Hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in cirrhotic patients were most frequently caused by Klebsiella spp (16.5%), coagulase-negative Staphylococci (13.7%) and E. faecium (11.5%). E. faecium bacteremia was more frequent in cirrhotic patients (11.5% versus 4.5%, p < 0.01). After adjusting for possible confounding factors, cirrhosis was associated with higher E. faecium hospital-acquired bloodstream infections risk (Odds ratio 2.5, 95% CI 1.3-4.5, p < 0.01). Cirrhotic patients had increased mortality compared to non-cirrhotic patients (Hazard Ratio 1.3, 95% CI 1.01-1.7, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill cirrhotic patients with hospital-acquired bloodstream infections exhibit distinct epidemiology, with more Gram-positive infections and particularly Enterococcus faecium.