The Ability of the Invasive Asian Longhorned Tick Haemaphysalis longicornis (Acari: Ixodidae) to Acquire and Transmit Rickettsia rickettsii (Rickettsiales: Rickettsiaceae), the Agent of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Under Laboratory Conditions.

The invasive Asian longhorned tick, Haemaphysalis longicornis Neumann, was first detected in the United States in 2017. It has since been found in 12 states, and there is concern that the tick's parthenogenetic ability and wide variety of host species may allow for broader dissemination. Of the tick-borne diseases endemic to the United States, Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF), a rapidly progressive and potentially fatal disease caused by Rickettsia rickettsii, is the most severe. There is considerable geographical overlap between spotted fever rickettsioses cases, which include RMSF, and the currently known distribution of H. longicornis, providing the potential for this tick to encounter this pathogen. We have evaluated the ability of H. longicornis to acquire and transmit R. rickettsii under laboratory conditions. Haemaphysalis longicornis as larvae and nymphs acquired the pathogen while feeding on infected guinea pigs. The infection persisted through every life stage, all of which were able to transmit R. rickettsii to naïve hosts. The pathogen was also transmitted at a low frequency between generations of H. longicornis through the ova. While H. longicornis was demonstrated to be a competent vector for R. rickettsii under laboratory conditions, the probability of its involvement in the maintenance and transmission of this pathogen in nature, as well as its potential impact on human health, requires further study.

A Survey of Key Opinion Leaders to Support Curriculum Development in Advanced Medical Science Liaison Training.

Medical science liaisons (MSLs) are field-based pharmaceutical or biomedical industry professionals whose role demands specialized product knowledge and skill in executing customer-facing activities. This report describes a survey of key opinion leaders (KOLs) to identify MSL skills most highly valued and those in need of enrichment with the objective of designing an advanced training curriculum for experienced MSLs. A total of 66 MSLs representing diverse therapeutic areas verbally administered a 9-question survey at the conclusion of a routine MSL-KOL interaction. There were 296 surveys completed, with most respondents (239 of 281; 82%) indicating that they meet with MSLs from other companies. Ninety-five percent (218 of 230) responded that the value provided by MSLs was comparable to that offered by other companies. When asked about top MSL attributes, KOLs mentioned product knowledge, scientific credibility, therapeutic area knowledge, timeliness of response, and communication skills. In terms of resources provided by MSLs, KOLs most often mentioned scientific information, unbiased product information, therapeutic area developments (including pipeline discussions), disease state information, and potential involvement in research or as an advisor. Based on the quantitative and qualitative results of this survey, a workshop curriculum focusing on advanced communication skills and networking techniques was developed and conducted successfully.

Gleason scores of prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens over the past 10 years: is there evidence for systematic upgrading?

BACKGROUND: With the advent of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) assay, an increased detection rate of prostate carcinoma has ensued. This has been associated with a downward stage migration. In contrast, grade has shifted heavily toward moderate differentiation. The authors sought to test the hypothesis that such changes in grade in part may be because of trends among pathologists to upgrade similar specimens over time. METHODS: Two expert genitourinary pathologists regraded 23 prostate biopsies and 15 radical prostatectomy specimens during a 3-year period (1989-1991). Each pathologist then regraded 32 prostate biopsies and 15 radical prostatectomies from 1998 to 2000. For both time periods, each pathologist regraded only specimens that they personally had graded initially. All specimens were scored using the Gleason system, the predominant system used in describing prostate carcinoma grade. In evaluating original and regraded scores, the authors classified score changes between less than or equal to 6 and greater than or equal to 7 or between 7 and greater than or equal to 8 as significant because such changes have a high probability of altering clinical management. The results were analyzed using the two-tailed Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Of 23 prostate biopsies from 1989 to 1991, 10 of 23 (44%) had a clinically significant Gleason score change when regraded, whereas 2 of 15 (13%) radical prostatectomy specimens from the same period had a clinically significant Gleason score change. A significant change in the distribution of biopsy Gleason scores on regrading was observed (P < 0.04). In comparison, when the prostate biopsies from 1998-2000 were regraded, 10 of 32 (31%) had a clinically significant grade change. Radical prostatectomy specimens from the same period revealed 3 of 15 (20%) with a clinically significant grade change. After regrading the biopsies from 1989-1991, 8 of 23 (35%) of were upgraded, whereas 2 of 23 (9%) were downgraded. In comparison, of the biopsies with significant changes from 1998 to 2000, 3 of 32 (9%) were upgraded, whereas 7 of 32 (22%) were downgraded. Of the radical prostatectomy specimens with significant change, only 2 of 15 from each period were upgraded. Significant upgrading (P < 0.005) occurred only in the biopsy specimens from 1989 to 1991. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' data suggest that rates of upgrading and downgrading of biopsy specimens differ between the 1989-1991 cases and the 1998-2000 cases, with the 1989-1991 samples exhibiting a significant change toward higher grades. Although not excluding the possibility of a change in the biology of prostate carcinoma over time, these findings suggest that the apparent trend toward higher biopsy grades in part may be because of how pathologists interpret these specimens today as compared with 10 years ago. Therefore, outcome studies including a biopsy Gleason score from older specimens as a risk variable have a significant chance of being vulnerable to this phenomenon. Based on the authors' data, all such specimens should undergo rereview.