Virtual medical research mentoring.

BACKGROUND: Medical research is important for professional advancement, and mentoring is a key means by which students and early-career doctors can engage in research. Contrasting international research collaborations, research mentoring programmes are often geographically limited. As the COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased use of online technology for classes and conferences, a virtual, international approach to medical research mentoring may be valuable. APPROACH: We hereby describe our experience at the Cardiovascular Analytics Group, a virtual international medical research mentoring group established in 2015. We make use of virtual platforms in multi-level mentoring with peer mentoring and emphasise active participation, early leadership, an open culture, accessible research support and a distributed research workflow. EVALUATION: With 63 active members from 14 different countries, the Group has been successful in training medical students and early-career medical graduates in academic medicine. Our members have led over 100 peer-reviewed publications of original research and reviews since 2015, winning 13 research prizes during this time. IMPLICATIONS: Our accessible-distributed model of virtual international medical research collaboration and multi-level mentoring is viable and efficient and caters to the needs of contemporary healthcare. Others should consider building similar models to improve medical research mentoring globally.

Sulfonylurea Is Associated With Higher Risks of Ventricular Arrhythmia or Sudden Cardiac Death Compared With Metformin: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Background Commonly prescribed diabetic medications such as metformin and sulfonylurea may be associated with different arrhythmogenic risks. This study compared the risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death between metformin and sulfonylurea users in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods and Results Patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or prescribed antidiabetic agents in Hong Kong between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2009, were included and followed up until December 31, 2019. Patients prescribed with both metformin and sulfonylurea or had prior myocardial infarction were excluded. The study outcome was a composite of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death. Metformin users and sulfonylurea users were matched at a 1:1 ratio by propensity score matching. The matched cohort consisted of 16 596 metformin users (47.70% men; age, 68±11 years; mean follow-up, 4.92±2.55 years) and 16 596 sulfonylurea users (49.80% men; age, 70±11 years; mean follow-up, 4.93±2.55 years). Sulfonylurea was associated with higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death than metformin hazard ratio (HR, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.73-2.08]). Such difference was consistently observed in subgroup analyses stratifying for insulin usage or known coronary heart disease. Conclusions Sulfonylurea use is associated with higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death than metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Cell-Based Functional IgE Assays Are Superior to Conventional Allergy Tests for Shrimp Allergy Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of shellfish allergy currently relies on patient history, skin prick test (SPT), and serum specific IgE (sIgE) quantification. These methods lack sufficient diagnostic accuracy, whereas the gold standard of oral food challenges is risky and burdensome. Markers of reactivity and severity of allergic reactions to shellfish will improve clinical care of these patients. OBJECTIVES: This study compared the diagnostic performance of SPT, sIgE, basophil activation test (BAT), and IgE crosslinking-induced luciferase expression (EXiLE) test for shrimp allergy. METHODS: Thirty-five subjects with documented history of shrimp allergic reactions were recruited and grouped according to results of double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). In addition to routine diagnostics, BAT (Flow CAST) and EXiLE test with shrimp extract and tropomyosin were performed. RESULTS: Of 35 subjects, 15 were shrimp allergic with pruritus, urticaria, and itchy mouth on DBPCFC, whereas 20 were tolerant to shrimp. Tropomyosin only accounted for 53.3% of sensitization among subjects with challenge-proven shrimp allergy. BAT using shrimp extract as stimulant showed the highest area under curve value (0.88), Youden Index (0.81), likelihood ratio (14.73), odds ratio (104), and variable importance (4.27) when compared with other assays and tropomyosin diagnosis. Results of BAT significantly correlated with those of EXiLE (r = 0.664, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: BAT is a more accurate diagnostic marker for shrimp allergy than SPT and shrimp sIgE, whereas the EXiLE test based on an IgE crosslinking assay is a good alternative to BAT. Tropomyosin may not be the most important shrimp allergen in Chinese, which warrants further investigation to search for other major allergens and diagnostic markers.