Risk of selection bias in randomized trials: further insight

Short-term responses of spider mites inform mechanisms of maize resistance to a generalist herbivore

Plants are attacked by diverse herbivorous pests with different host specializations. While host plant resistance influences pest pressure, how resistance impacts the behaviors of generalist and specialist herbivores, and the relationship to resistance, is less well known. Here, we investigated the short-term (< 1 h) behavioral changes of a generalist herbivore, the two-spotted spider mite (TSM), and a specialist herbivore, the Banks grass mite (BGM), after introduction to no-choice Tanglefoot leaf-arenas (2 × 2 cm) of three maize inbred lines (B73, B75, and B96). The widely-used inbred line B73 is susceptible to spider mites, while B75 and B96 are known to be mite resistant, especially to TSM. Video tracking was used to record TSM and BGM walking, probing, feeding, resting, web-building and travel distance on arenas of each line. Mite oviposition was also recorded after 72 h. B75, a resistant line, decreased the feeding behavior (i.e., time) of both mite species compared to B73 (susceptible control) and B96. Moreover, TSM appeared to be sensitive to both resistant lines (B75 and B96) with reduced oviposition, and increased resting and web-building times compared to susceptible B73. In contrast, the specialist BGM showed no difference in oviposition, resting and web-building time across all maize inbred lines. Our findings of quite broad and short-term responses of TSM to B75 and B96 are consistent with a role for constitutive or rapidly induced plant defenses in maize in conferring TSM resistance. Other mechanisms of plant resistance may be needed, however, for defense against specialists like BGM.

Prodromal Dementia With Lewy Bodies: Evolution of Symptoms and Predictors of Dementia Onset

BACKGROUND

Research criteria for prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) were published in 2020, but little is known regarding prodromal DLB in clinical settings.

METHODS

We identified non-demented participants without neurodegenerative disease from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set who converted to DLB at a subsequent visit. Prevalence of neuropsychiatric and motor symptoms were examined up to 5 years prior to DLB diagnosis.

RESULTS

The sample included 116 participants clinically diagnosed with DLB and 348 age and sex-matched (1:3) Healthy Controls. Motor slowing was present in approximately 70% of participants 3 years prior to DLB diagnosis. In the prodromal phase, 50% of DLB participants demonstrated gait disorder, 70% had rigidity, 20% endorsed visual hallucinations, and over 50% of participants endorsed REM sleep behavior disorder. Apathy, depression, and anxiety were common prodromal neuropsychiatric symptoms. The presence of 1+ core clinical features of DLB in combination with apathy, depression, or anxiety resulted in the greatest AUC (0.815; 95% CI: 0.767, 0.865) for distinguishing HC from prodromal DLB 1 year prior to diagnosis. The presence of 2+ core clinical features was also accurate in differentiating between groups (AUC = 0.806; 95% CI: 0.756, 0.855).

CONCLUSION

A wide range of motor, neuropsychiatric and other core clinical symptoms are common in prodromal DLB. A combination of core clinical features, neuropsychiatric symptoms and cognitive impairment can accurately differentiate DLB from normal aging prior to dementia onset.

Implementing Optimal Designs for Dose-Response Studies Through Adaptive Randomization for a Small Population Group

In dose-response studies with censored time-to-event outcomes, D-optimal designs depend on the true model and the amount of censored data. In practice, such designs can be implemented adaptively, by performing dose assignments according to updated knowledge of the dose-response curve at interim analysis. It is also essential that treatment allocation involves randomization-to mitigate various experimental biases and enable valid statistical inference at the end of the trial. In this work, we perform a comparison of several adaptive randomization procedures that can be used for implementing D-optimal designs for dose-response studies with time-to-event outcomes with small to moderate sample sizes. We consider single-stage, two-stage, and multi-stage adaptive designs. We also explore robustness of the designs to experimental (chronological and selection) biases. Simulation studies provide evidence that both the choice of an allocation design and a randomization procedure to implement the target allocation impact the quality of dose-response estimation, especially for small samples. For best performance, a multi-stage adaptive design with small cohort sizes should be implemented using a randomization procedure that closely attains the targeted D-optimal design at each stage. The results of the current work should help clinical investigators select an appropriate randomization procedure for their dose-response study.