The Landscape of NIAID-funded Observational COVID-19 Cohort Studies.

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 since late 2019 represented an unprecedented public health emergency, which included a need to fully understand COVID-19 disease across all ages and populations. In response, the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) rapidly funded epidemiology studies that monitored COVID-19. However, the diversity and breadth of the populations studied in NIAID-funded COVID-19 observational cohorts were not easy to extrapolate because of siloed approaches to collect and report data within NIAID. Here, we describe the effort to develop a harmonized cohort study reporting tool that includes common epidemiological data elements as well as NIAID priorities. We report its implementation to analyze metadata from 58 COVID-19 cohort studies funded February 2020 to June 2021, visualize key metadata including geographic distribution, study duration, participant demographics, sample types collected, and scientific priorities addressed. A bibliographic analysis highlights the scientific publications and citations across these funded studies and demonstrates their enormous impact on the COVID-19 field. These analyses highlight how common data elements and reporting tools can assist funding agencies to capture the landscape and potential gaps during public health responses and how they can assist in decision making.

Allogeneic chimeric antigen receptor-T cells with CRISPR-disrupted programmed death-1 checkpoint exhibit enhanced functional fitness.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Therapeutic disruption of immune checkpoints has significantly advanced the armamentarium of approaches for treating cancer. The prominent role of the programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 axis for downregulating T cell function offers a tractable strategy for enhancing the disease-modifying impact of CAR-T cell therapy. METHODS: To address checkpoint interference, primary human T cells were genome edited with a next-generation CRISPR-based platform (Cas9 chRDNA) by knockout of the PDCD1 gene encoding the PD-1 receptor. Site-specific insertion of a chimeric antigen receptor specific for CD19 into the T cell receptor alpha constant locus was implemented to drive cytotoxic activity. RESULTS: These allogeneic CAR-T cells (CB-010) promoted longer survival of mice in a well-established orthotopic tumor xenograft model of a B cell malignancy compared with identically engineered CAR-T cells without a PDCD1 knockout. The persistence kinetics of CB-010 cells in hematologic tissues versus CAR-T cells without PDCD1 disruption were similar, suggesting the robust initial debulking of established tumor xenografts was due to enhanced functional fitness. By single-cell RNA-Seq analyses, CB-010 cells, when compared with identically engineered CAR-T cells without a PDCD1 knockout, exhibited fewer Treg cells, lower exhaustion phenotypes and reduced dysfunction signatures and had higher activation, glycolytic and oxidative phosphorylation signatures. Further, an enhancement of mitochondrial metabolic fitness was observed, including increased respiratory capacity, a hallmark of less differentiated T cells. CONCLUSIONS: Genomic PD-1 checkpoint disruption in the context of allogeneic CAR-T cell therapy may provide a compelling option for treating B lymphoid malignancies.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Status, Tenofovir Exposure, and the Risk of Poor Coronavirus Disease 19 Outcomes: Real-World Analysis From 6 United States Cohorts Before Vaccine Rollout.

BACKGROUND: People with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PWH) may be at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. We examined HIV status and COVID-19 severity, and whether tenofovir, used by PWH for HIV treatment and people without HIV (PWoH) for HIV prevention, was associated with protection. METHODS: Within 6 cohorts of PWH and PWoH in the United States, we compared the 90-day risk of any hospitalization, COVID-19 hospitalization, and mechanical ventilation or death by HIV status and by prior exposure to tenofovir, among those with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection between 1 March and 30 November 2020. Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were estimated by targeted maximum likelihood estimation, with adjustment for demographics, cohort, smoking, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, calendar period of first infection, and CD4 cell counts and HIV RNA levels (in PWH only). RESULTS: Among PWH (n = 1785), 15% were hospitalized for COVID-19 and 5% received mechanical ventilation or died, compared with 6% and 2%, respectively, for PWoH (n = 189 351). Outcome prevalence was lower for PWH and PWoH with prior tenofovir use. In adjusted analyses, PWH were at increased risk compared with PWoH for any hospitalization (aRR, 1.31 [95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.44]), COVID-19 hospitalizations (1.29 [1.15-1.45]), and mechanical ventilation or death (1.51 [1.19-1.92]). Prior tenofovir use was associated with reduced hospitalizations among PWH (aRR, 0.85 [95% confidence interval, .73-.99]) and PWoH (0.71 [.62-.81]). CONCLUSIONS: Before COVID-19 vaccine availability, PWH were at greater risk for severe outcomes than PWoH. Tenofovir was associated with a significant reduction in clinical events for both PWH and PWoH.

Acceptability of Telehealth for Multidiagnostic Suicidal Patients in a Real-World Dialectical Behavior Therapy Clinic During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) delivered through telehealth to complex, suicidal patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We surveyed 163 adult participants enrolled in outpatient services at a private, free-standing DBT clinic certified by the DBT-Linehan Board of Certification for its fidelity to the treatment. Treatment satisfaction was assessed, as well as ease of telehealth over time, differences in satisfaction between patients who had previously experienced face-to-face treatment and those who had only experienced telehealth, patients' beliefs regarding the impact of telehealth on their progress, and preference for face-to-face versus telehealth services. Additionally, participants' reasons for liking and disliking telehealth were reported. Results: The average overall satisfaction rating was 82.26 (±18.71) on a 100-point scale. Factors identified as being relevant to satisfaction included increased access to care, saving time and money, and increased comfort participating in therapy from home. Factors identified as relevant to dissatisfaction included feeling less connected to therapists and other patients. The majority of participants reported that telehealth positively impacted or did not impact treatment progress. Satisfaction was significantly related to participants' perception of telehealth's impact on progress in treatment. Demographic variables were also included in the analyses, but were unrelated to satisfaction. Conclusions: Findings indicate that, from the point of view of consumer satisfaction, telehealth appears satisfactory for delivery of DBT and may play an increased role in behavioral health care postpandemic.

Differences in COVID-19 testing and adverse outcomes by race, ethnicity, sex, and health system setting in a large diverse US cohort.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic led to differences in COVID-19 testing and adverse outcomes. We examine differences in testing and adverse outcomes by race/ethnicity and sex across a geographically diverse and system-based COVID-19 cohort collaboration. METHODS: Observational study among adults (≥18 years) within six US cohorts from March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020 using data from electronic health record and patient reporting. Race/ethnicity and sex as risk factors were primary exposures, with health system type (integrated health system, academic health system, or interval cohort) as secondary. Proportions measured SARS-CoV-2 testing and positivity; attributed hospitalization and death related to COVID-19. Relative risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals quantified associations between exposures and main outcomes. RESULTS: 5,958,908 patients were included. Hispanic patients had the highest proportions of SARS-CoV-2 testing (16%) and positivity (18%), while Asian/Pacific Islander patients had the lowest portions tested (11%) and White patients had the lowest positivity rates (5%). Men had a lower likelihood of testing (RR = 0.90 [0.89-0.90]) and a higher positivity risk (RR = 1.16 [1.14-1.18]) compared to women. Black patients were more likely to have COVID-19-related hospitalizations (RR = 1.36 [1.28-1.44]) and death (RR = 1.17 [1.03-1.32]) compared with White patients. Men were more likely to be hospitalized (RR = 1.30 [1.16-1.22]) or die (RR = 1.70 [1.53-1.89]) compared to women. These racial/ethnic and sex differences were reflected in both health system types. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports evidence of disparities by race/ethnicity and sex during the COVID-19 pandemic that persisted even in healthcare settings with reduced barriers to accessing care. Further research is needed to understand and prevent the drivers that resulted in higher burdens of morbidity among certain Black patients and men.

Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 with clinical condition definitions and comparison in a matched cohort.

Disease characterization of Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) does not account for pre-existing conditions and time course of incidence. We utilized longitudinal data and matching to a COVID PCR-negative population to discriminate PASC conditions over time within our patient population during 2020. Clinical Classification Software was used to identify PASC condition groupings. Conditions were specified acute and persistent (occurring 0-30 days post COVID PCR and persisted 30-120 days post-test) or late (occurring initially 30-120 days post-test). We matched 3:1 COVID PCR-negative COVIDPCR-positive by age, sex, testing month and service area, controlling for pre-existing conditions up to four years prior; 28,118 PCR-positive to 70,293 PCR-negative patients resulted. We estimated PASC risk from the matched cohort. Risk of any PASC condition was 12% greater for PCR-positive patients in the late period with a significantly higher risk of anosmia, cardiac dysrhythmia, diabetes, genitourinary disorders, malaise, and nonspecific chest pain. Our findings contribute to a more refined PASC definition which can enhance clinical care.

Analysis of Severe Illness After Postvaccination COVID-19 Breakthrough Among Adults With and Without HIV in the US.

Importance: Understanding the severity of postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 (ie, COVID-19) breakthrough illness among people with HIV (PWH) can inform vaccine guidelines and risk-reduction recommendations. Objective: To estimate the rate and risk of severe breakthrough illness among vaccinated PWH and people without HIV (PWoH) who experience a breakthrough infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, the Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET-II) collaboration included adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV who were receiving care and were fully vaccinated by June 30, 2021, along with PWoH matched according to date fully vaccinated, age group, race, ethnicity, and sex from 4 US integrated health systems and academic centers. Those with postvaccination COVID-19 breakthrough before December 31, 2021, were eligible. Exposures: HIV infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was severe COVID-19 breakthrough illness, defined as hospitalization within 28 days after a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection with a primary or secondary COVID-19 discharge diagnosis. Discrete time proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs of severe breakthrough illness within 28 days of breakthrough COVID-19 by HIV status adjusting for demographic variables, COVID-19 vaccine type, and clinical factors. The proportion of patients who received mechanical ventilation or died was compared by HIV status. Results: Among 3649 patients with breakthrough COVID-19 (1241 PWH and 2408 PWoH), most were aged 55 years or older (2182 patients [59.8%]) and male (3244 patients [88.9%]). The cumulative incidence of severe illness in the first 28 days was low and comparable between PWoH and PWH (7.3% vs 6.7%; risk difference, -0.67%; 95% CI, -2.58% to 1.23%). The risk of severe breakthrough illness was 59% higher in PWH with CD4 cell counts less than 350 cells/µL compared with PWoH (aHR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.46; P = .049). In multivariable analyses among PWH, being female, older, having a cancer diagnosis, and lower CD4 cell count were associated with increased risk of severe breakthrough illness, whereas previous COVID-19 was associated with reduced risk. Among 249 hospitalized patients, 24 (9.6%) were mechanically ventilated and 20 (8.0%) died, with no difference by HIV status. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the risk of severe COVID-19 breakthrough illness within 28 days of a breakthrough infection was low among vaccinated PWH and PWoH. PWH with moderate or severe immune suppression had a higher risk of severe breakthrough infection and should be included in groups prioritized for additional vaccine doses and risk-reduction strategies.

Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Results during a Period of Low Prevalence.

Accurate, highly specific immunoassays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to evaluate seroprevalence. This study investigated the concordance of results across four immunoassays targeting different antigens for sera collected at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the United States. Specimens from All of Us participants contributed between January and March 2020 were tested using the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (immunoglobulin G) assay (Abbott) and the EuroImmun SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (EI). Participants with discordant results, participants with concordant positive results, and a subset of concordant negative results by Abbott and EI were also tested using the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgG) test (Roche) and the Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Vitros anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG test (Ortho). The agreement and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for paired assay combinations. SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations were quantified for specimens with at least two positive results across four immunoassays. Among the 24,079 participants, the percent agreement for the Abbott and EI assays was 98.8% (95% confidence interval, 98.7%, 99%). Of the 490 participants who were also tested by Ortho and Roche, the probability-weighted percentage of agreement (95% confidence interval) between Ortho and Roche was 98.4% (97.9%, 98.9%), that between EI and Ortho was 98.5% (92.9%, 99.9%), that between Abbott and Roche was 98.9% (90.3%, 100.0%), that between EI and Roche was 98.9% (98.6%, 100.0%), and that between Abbott and Ortho was 98.4% (91.2%, 100.0%). Among the 32 participants who were positive by at least 2 immunoassays, 21 had quantifiable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations by research assays. The results across immunoassays revealed concordance during a period of low prevalence. However, the frequency of false positivity during a period of low prevalence supports the use of two sequentially performed tests for unvaccinated individuals who are seropositive by the first test. IMPORTANCE What is the agreement of commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) assays during a time of low coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevalence and no vaccine availability? Serological tests produced concordant results in a time of low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and no vaccine availability, driven largely by the proportion of samples that were negative by two immunoassays. The CDC recommends two sequential tests for positivity for future pandemic preparedness. In a subset analysis, quantified antinucleocapsid and antispike SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies do not suggest the need to specify the antigen targets of the sequential assays in the CDC's recommendation because false positivity varied as much between assays targeting the same antigen as it did between assays targeting different antigens.

Analysis of Postvaccination Breakthrough COVID-19 Infections Among Adults With HIV in the United States.

Importance: Recommendations for additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines for people with HIV (PWH) are restricted to those with advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk after vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines. Objective: To estimate the rate and risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated PWH and people without HIV (PWoH) in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II (of the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design [NA-ACCORD], which is part of the International Epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS [IeDEA]), collaboration of 4 prospective, electronic health record-based cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Adult PWH who were fully vaccinated prior to June 30, 2021, were matched with PWoH on date of full vaccination, age, race and ethnicity, and sex and followed up through December 31, 2021. Exposures: HIV infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: COVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after a patient was fully vaccinated. Results: Among 113 994 patients (33 029 PWH and 80 965 PWoH), most were 55 years or older (80 017 [70%]) and male (104 967 [92%]); 47 098 (41%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 43 218 (38%) were non-Hispanic White. The rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH vs PWoH (55 [95% CI, 52-58] cases per 1000 person-years vs 43 [95% CI, 42-45] cases per 1000 person-years). Cumulative incidence of breakthroughs 9 months after full vaccination was low (3.8% [95% CI, 3.7%-3.9%]), albeit higher in PWH vs PWoH (4.4% vs 3.5%; log-rank P < .001; risk difference, 0.9% [95% CI, 0.6%-1.2%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 28% higher in PWH vs PWoH (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.19-1.37]). Among PWH, younger age (<45 y vs 45-54 y), history of COVID-19, and not receiving an additional dose (aHR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.58-0.88]) were associated with increased risk of breakthrough infections. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression, but high CD4 count (ie, ≥500 cells/mm3) was associated with fewer breakthroughs among PWH. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, COVID-19 vaccination, especially with an additional dose, was effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through December 31, 2021. PWH had an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared with PWoH. Expansion of recommendations for additional vaccine doses to all PWH should be considered.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Positivity Among Persons With and Without HIV in 6 US Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: It is not definitively known if persons with HIV (PWH) are more likely to be SARS-CoV-2 tested or test positive than persons without HIV (PWoH). We describe SARS-CoV-2 testing and positivity in 6 large geographically and demographically diverse cohorts of PWH and PWoH in the United States. SETTING: The Corona Infectious Virus Epidemiology Team comprises 5 clinical cohorts within a health system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA; Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States, Rockville, MD; University of North Carolina Health, Chapel Hill, NC; Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN; and Veterans Aging Cohort Study) and 1 interval cohort (Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study/Women's Interagency HIV Study Combined Cohort Study). METHODS: We calculated the proportion of patients SARS-CoV-2 tested and the test positivity proportion by HIV status from March 1 to December 31, 2020. RESULTS: The cohorts ranged in size from 1675 to 31,304 PWH and 1430 to 3,742,604 PWoH. The proportion of PWH who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (19.6%-40.5% across sites) was significantly higher than PWoH (14.8%-29.4%) in the clinical cohorts. However, among those tested, the proportion of patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was comparable by HIV status; the difference in proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positivity ranged from 4.7% lower to 1.4% higher. CONCLUSIONS: Although PWH had higher testing proportions compared with PWoH, we did not find evidence of increased positivity in 6 large, diverse populations across the United States. Ongoing monitoring of testing, positivity, and COVID-19-related outcomes in PWH are needed, given availability, response, and durability of COVID-19 vaccines; emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants; and latest therapeutic options.

Antibodies to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in All of Us Research Program Participants, 2 January to 18 March 2020.

BACKGROUND: With limited severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) testing capacity in the United States at the start of the epidemic (January-March 2020), testing was focused on symptomatic patients with a travel history throughout February, obscuring the picture of SARS-CoV-2 seeding and community transmission. We sought to identify individuals with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the early weeks of the US epidemic. METHODS: All of Us study participants in all 50 US states provided blood specimens during study visits from 2 January to 18 March 2020. Participants were considered seropositive if they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies with the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the EUROIMMUN SARS-CoV-2 ELISA in a sequential testing algorithm. The sensitivity and specificity of these ELISAs and the net sensitivity and specificity of the sequential testing algorithm were estimated, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The estimated sensitivities of the Abbott and EUROIMMUN assays were 100% (107 of 107 [95% CI: 96.6%-100%]) and 90.7% (97 of 107 [83.5%-95.4%]), respectively, and the estimated specificities were 99.5% (995 of 1000 [98.8%-99.8%]) and 99.7% (997 of 1000 [99.1%-99.9%]), respectively. The net sensitivity and specificity of our sequential testing algorithm were 90.7% (97 of 107 [95% CI: 83.5%-95.4%]) and 100.0% (1000 of 1000 [99.6%-100%]), respectively. Of the 24 079 study participants with blood specimens from 2 January to 18 March 2020, 9 were seropositive, 7 before the first confirmed case in the states of Illinois, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Mississippi. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings identified SARS-CoV-2 infections weeks before the first recognized cases in 5 US states.

COVID-19 infections post-vaccination by HIV status in the United States.

IMPORTANCE: Recommendations for additional doses of COVID vaccine are restricted to people with HIV who have advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk post-vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines. OBJECTIVE: Estimate the risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated people with (PWH) and without (PWoH) HIV in the US. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II cohort collaboration consists of 4 longitudinal cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Each cohort identified individuals ≥18 years old, in-care, and fully vaccinated for COVID-19 through 30 June 2021. PWH were matched to PWoH on date fully vaccinated, age group, race/ethnicity, and sex at birth. Incidence rates per 1,000 person-years and cumulative incidence of breakthrough infections with 95% confidence intervals ([,]) were estimated by HIV status. Cox proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of breakthrough infections by HIV status adjusting for demographic factors, prior COVID-19 illness, vaccine type (BNT162b2, [Pfizer], mRNA-1273 [Moderna], Jansen Ad26.COV2.S [J&J]), calendar time, and cohort. Risk factors for breakthroughs among PWH, were also investigated. EXPOSURE: HIV infection. OUTCOME: COVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after an individual was fully vaccinated. RESULTS: Among 109,599 individuals (31,840 PWH and 77,759 PWoH), the rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH versus PWoH: 44 [41, 48] vs. 31 [29, 33] per 1,000 person-years. Cumulative incidence at 210 days after date fully vaccinated was low, albeit higher in PWH versus PWoH overall (2.8% versus 2.1%, log-rank p<0.001, risk difference=0.7% [0.4%, 1.0%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 41% higher in PWH versus PWoH (aHR=1.41 [1.28, 1.56]). Among PWH, younger age (18-24 versus 45-54), history of COVID-19 prior to fully vaccinated date, and J&J vaccination (versus Pfizer) were associated with increased risk of breakthroughs. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression or CD4 count among PWH. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: COVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through 30 Sept 2021. PWH have an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared to PWoH. Recommendations for additional vaccine doses should be expanded to all PWH.

Toward Understanding COVID-19 Recovery: National Institutes of Health Workshop on Postacute COVID-19.

Over the past year, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has swept the globe, resulting in an enormous worldwide burden of infection and mortality. However, the additional toll resulting from long-term consequences of the pandemic has yet to be tallied. Heterogeneous disease manifestations and syndromes are now recognized among some persons after their initial recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection, representing in the broadest sense a failure to return to a baseline state of health after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. On 3 to 4 December 2020, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in collaboration with other Institutes and Centers of the National Institutes of Health, convened a virtual workshop to summarize existing knowledge on postacute COVID-19 and to identify key knowledge gaps regarding this condition.

Tranexamic acid administration in the field does not affect admission thromboelastography after traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: No Food and Drug Administration-approved medication improves outcomes following traumatic brain injury (TBI). A forthcoming clinical trial that evaluated the effects of two prehospital tranexamic acid (TXA) dosing strategies compared with placebo demonstrated no differences in thromboelastography (TEG) values. We proposed to explore the impact of TXA on markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis in patients with moderate to severe TBI. METHODS: Data were extracted from a placebo-controlled clinical trial in which patients 15 years or older with TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-12) and systolic blood pressure of ≥90 mm Hg were randomized prehospital to receive placebo bolus/placebo infusion (placebo), 1 g of TXA bolus/1 g of TXA infusion (bolus maintenance), or 2 g of TXA bolus/placebo infusion (bolus only). Thromboelastography was performed, and coagulation measures including prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, international ratio, fibrinogen, D-dimer, plasmin-antiplasmin (PAP), thrombin antithrombin, tissue plasminogen activator, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 were quantified at admission and 6 hours later. RESULTS: Of 966 patients receiving study drug, 700 had laboratory tests drawn at admission and 6 hours later. There were no statistically significant differences in TEG values, including LY30, between groups (p > 0.05). No differences between prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, international ratio, fibrinogen, thrombin antithrombin, tissue plasminogen activator, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 were demonstrated across treatment groups. Concentrations of D-dimer in TXA treatment groups were less than placebo at 6 hours (p < 0.001). Concentrations of PAP in TXA treatment groups were less than placebo on admission (p < 0.001) and 6 hours (p = 0.02). No differences in D-dimer and PAP were observed between bolus maintenance and bolus only. CONCLUSION: While D-dimer and PAP levels reflect a lower degree of fibrinolysis following prehospital administration of TXA when compared with placebo in a large prehospital trial of patients with TBI, TEG obtained on admission and 6 hours later did not demonstrate any differences in fibrinolysis between the two TXA dosing regimens and placebo. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic test, level III.

Effect of Out-of-Hospital Tranexamic Acid vs Placebo on 6-Month Functional Neurologic Outcomes in Patients With Moderate or Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Importance: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability due to trauma. Early administration of tranexamic acid may benefit patients with TBI. Objective: To determine whether tranexamic acid treatment initiated in the out-of-hospital setting within 2 hours of injury improves neurologic outcome in patients with moderate or severe TBI. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial at 20 trauma centers and 39 emergency medical services agencies in the US and Canada from May 2015 to November 2017. Eligible participants (N = 1280) included out-of-hospital patients with TBI aged 15 years or older with Glasgow Coma Scale score of 12 or less and systolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or higher. Interventions: Three interventions were evaluated, with treatment initiated within 2 hours of TBI: out-of-hospital tranexamic acid (1 g) bolus and in-hospital tranexamic acid (1 g) 8-hour infusion (bolus maintenance group; n = 312), out-of-hospital tranexamic acid (2 g) bolus and in-hospital placebo 8-hour infusion (bolus only group; n = 345), and out-of-hospital placebo bolus and in-hospital placebo 8-hour infusion (placebo group; n = 309). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was favorable neurologic function at 6 months (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score >4 [moderate disability or good recovery]) in the combined tranexamic acid group vs the placebo group. Asymmetric significance thresholds were set at 0.1 for benefit and 0.025 for harm. There were 18 secondary end points, of which 5 are reported in this article: 28-day mortality, 6-month Disability Rating Scale score (range, 0 [no disability] to 30 [death]), progression of intracranial hemorrhage, incidence of seizures, and incidence of thromboembolic events. Results: Among 1063 participants, a study drug was not administered to 96 randomized participants and 1 participant was excluded, resulting in 966 participants in the analysis population (mean age, 42 years; 255 [74%] male participants; mean Glasgow Coma Scale score, 8). Of these participants, 819 (84.8%) were available for primary outcome analysis at 6-month follow-up. The primary outcome occurred in 65% of patients in the tranexamic acid groups vs 62% in the placebo group (difference, 3.5%; [90% 1-sided confidence limit for benefit, -0.9%]; P = .16; [97.5% 1-sided confidence limit for harm, 10.2%]; P = .84). There was no statistically significant difference in 28-day mortality between the tranexamic acid groups vs the placebo group (14% vs 17%; difference, -2.9% [95% CI, -7.9% to 2.1%]; P = .26), 6-month Disability Rating Scale score (6.8 vs 7.6; difference, -0.9 [95% CI, -2.5 to 0.7]; P = .29), or progression of intracranial hemorrhage (16% vs 20%; difference, -5.4% [95% CI, -12.8% to 2.1%]; P = .16). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with moderate to severe TBI, out-of-hospital tranexamic acid administration within 2 hours of injury compared with placebo did not significantly improve 6-month neurologic outcome as measured by the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01990768.

The effect of regular consumption of lupin-containing foods on glycaemic control and blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a metabolic disorder characterized by high glucose and insulin resistance. It is strongly linked to lifestyle, including poor diet and physical inactivity. Lupin is a novel food ingredient, rich in protein and fibre with negligible sugar and starch, which can be incorporated into various foods to reduce glycaemic load. Regular consumption of lupin-enriched foods may be a novel and easily achievable means of reducing overall glycaemic load and improving glycaemic control in diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether regular consumption of lupin-enriched foods can improve glycaemic control and lower blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. DESIGN: Fourteen men and 8 women (mean age 58.0 ± 6.6 years and BMI 29.0 ± 3.5 kg m-2) with type 2 diabetes mellitus were recruited from the general population to take part in a double-blind, randomised, controlled cross-over study. Participants consumed lupin or control foods for breakfast and lunch every day, and for dinner at least 3 days per week during the 8-week treatment periods. Lupin-enriched foods consisted of bread, pasta, Weetbix™ cereal and crumbs, with energy-matched control products. Treatments were completed in random order with an 8-week washout period. All participants monitored their blood glucose levels pre- and post-breakfast and lunch, and their blood pressure in the morning and evening, 3 days per week for the duration of each treatment period. RESULTS: Seventeen participants completed both treatment arms, with all 22 participants (14 males, 8 females) analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Eight weeks consumption of lupin-enriched food had no significant effect on mean blood glucose levels (mean difference: -0.08 ± 0.06 mmol L-1, p = 0.214) or post-prandial blood glucose levels (-0.13 ± 0.10 mmol L-1, p = 0.196). There was no effect on home systolic (-0.4 ± 0.4 mmHg, p = 0.33) or diastolic (0.3 ± 0.3 mmHg, p = 0.321) blood pressure and heart rate (0.5 ± 0.3 bpm, p = 0.152), and no effect on body weight throughout the treatment periods. CONCLUSION: Regular consumption of lupin-enriched foods had no significant effect on glycaemic control or blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Harnessing type I CRISPR-Cas systems for genome engineering in human cells.

Type I CRISPR-Cas systems are the most abundant adaptive immune systems in bacteria and archaea1,2. Target interference relies on a multi-subunit, RNA-guided complex called Cascade3,4, which recruits a trans-acting helicase-nuclease, Cas3, for target degradation5-7. Type I systems have rarely been used for eukaryotic genome engineering applications owing to the relative difficulty of heterologous expression of the multicomponent Cascade complex. Here, we fuse Cascade to the dimerization-dependent, non-specific FokI nuclease domain8-11 and achieve RNA-guided gene editing in multiple human cell lines with high specificity and efficiencies of up to ~50%. FokI-Cascade can be reconstituted via an optimized two-component expression system encoding the CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins on a single polycistronic vector and the guide RNA (gRNA) on a separate plasmid. Expression of the full Cascade-Cas3 complex in human cells resulted in targeted deletions of up to ~200 kb in length. Our work demonstrates that highly abundant, previously untapped type I CRISPR-Cas systems can be harnessed for genome engineering applications in eukaryotic cells.

Research priorities to inform "Treat All" policy implementation for people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: a consensus statement from the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA).

INTRODUCTION: "Treat All" - the treatment of all people with HIV, irrespective of disease stage or CD4 cell count - represents a paradigm shift in HIV care that has the potential to end AIDS as a public health threat. With accelerating implementation of Treat All in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), there is a need for a focused agenda and research to identify and inform strategies for promoting timely uptake of HIV treatment, retention in care, and sustained viral suppression and addressing bottlenecks impeding implementation. METHODS: The Delphi approach was used to develop consensus around research priorities for Treat All implementation in SSA. Through an iterative process (June 2017 to March 2018), a set of research priorities was collectively formulated and refined by a technical working group and shared for review, deliberation and prioritization by more than 200 researchers, implementation experts, policy/decision-makers, and HIV community representatives in East, Central, Southern and West Africa. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The process resulted in a list of nine research priorities for generating evidence to guide Treat All policies, implementation strategies and monitoring efforts. These priorities highlight the need for increased focus on adolescents, men, and those with mental health and substance use disorders - groups that remain underserved in SSA and for whom more effective testing, linkage and care strategies need to be identified. The priorities also reflect consensus on the need to: (1) generate accurate national and sub-national estimates of the size of key populations and describe those who remain underserved along the HIV-care continuum; (2) characterize the timeliness of HIV care and short- and long-term HIV care continuum outcomes, as well as factors influencing timely achievement of these outcomes; (3) estimate the incidence and prevalence of HIV-drug resistance and regimen switching; and (4) identify cost-effective and affordable service delivery models and strategies to optimize uptake and minimize gaps, disparities, and losses along the HIV-care continuum, particularly among underserved populations. CONCLUSIONS: Reflecting consensus among a broad group of experts, researchers, policy- and decision-makers, PLWH, and other stakeholders, the resulting research priorities highlight important evidence gaps that are relevant for ministries of health, funders, normative bodies and research networks.

Big data management challenges in health research-a literature review.

Big data management for information centralization (i.e. making data of interest findable) and integration (i.e. making related data connectable) in health research is a defining challenge in biomedical informatics. While essential to create a foundation for knowledge discovery, optimized solutions to deliver high-quality and easy-to-use information resources are not thoroughly explored. In this review, we identify the gaps between current data management approaches and the need for new capacity to manage big data generated in advanced health research. Focusing on these unmet needs and well-recognized problems, we introduce state-of-the-art concepts, approaches and technologies for data management from computing academia and industry to explore improvement solutions. We explain the potential and significance of these advances for biomedical informatics. In addition, we discuss specific issues that have a great impact on technical solutions for developing the next generation of digital products (tools and data) to facilitate the raw-data-to-knowledge process in health research.