Input-output specific orchestration of aversive valence in lateral habenula during stress dynamics

Stress has been considered as a major risk factor for depressive disorders, triggering depression onset via inducing persistent dysfunctions in specialized brain regions and neural circuits. Among various regions across the brain, the lateral habenula (LHb) serves as a critical hub for processing aversive information during the dynamic process of stress accumulation, thus having been implicated in the pathogenesis of depression. LHb neurons integrate aversive valence conveyed by distinct upstream inputs, many of which selectively innervate the medial part (LHbM) or lateral part (LHbL) of LHb. LHb subregions also separately assign aversive valence via dissociable projections to the downstream targets in the midbrain which provides feedback loops. Despite these strides, the spatiotemporal dynamics of LHb-centric neural circuits remain elusive during the progression of depression-like state under stress. In this review, we attempt to describe a framework in which LHb orchestrates aversive valence via the input-output specific neuronal architecture. Notably, a physiological form of Hebbian plasticity in LHb under multiple stressors has been unveiled to incubate neuronal hyperactivity in an input-specific manner, which causally encodes chronic stress experience and drives depression onset. Collectively, the recent progress and future efforts in elucidating LHb circuits shed light on early interventions and circuit-specific antidepressant therapies.

Comparison of contemporary transcatheter heart valve prostheses: data from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY)

BACKGROUND

Various second-generation transcatheter heart valve (THV) prostheses with high clinical efficacy and safety are available, but there is limited large-scale data available comparing their hemodynamic performance and clinical implications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the hemodynamic performance and short-term clinical outcome of four second-generation THV prostheses.

METHODS

24,124 patients out of the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (Evolut™ R n = 7028, Acurate neo™ n = 2922, Portico n = 878 and Sapien 3 n = 13,296) were included in this analysis. Propensity-score weighted analysis was performed to control for differences in age, left ventricular function, STS score and sex. Primary endpoint was survival at one-year, secondary endpoints were 30 days survival, pre-discharge transvalvular gradients, paravalvular leakage and peri-procedural complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-day and one-year survival were not significantly different between the four patient groups. Transvalvular gradients in Evolut™ R and Acurate neo™ were significantly lower as compared to Portico and Sapien 3 at hospital discharge. This difference exists across all annulus sizes. Paravalvular leakage ≥ II occurred significantly less often in the Sapien 3 group (1.2%, p < 0.0001). Rate of severe procedural complications was low and comparable in all groups. Permanent pacemaker implantation rate at one year was lowest in the ACUARATE neo group (13.0%) and highest in the Evolut™ R group (21.9%).

CONCLUSION

Albeit comparable short-term clinical outcomes there are certain differences regarding hemodynamic performance and permanent pacemaker implantation rate between currently available THV prostheses which should be considered for individual prosthesis selection.

Head-to-head comparison of contrast-enhanced mammography and contrast-enhanced MRI for assessing pathological complete response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) are in need of a more patient-friendly imaging modality such as contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) for monitoring therapy response. The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performances of CEM and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) for assessing pathological complete response (pCR) in these patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through March 2023 to identify studies reporting a head-to-head comparison of CEM and CE-MRI in detecting pCR in breast cancer patients receiving NAT. Pooled diagnostic performance was calculated using a bivariate random-effects model, and an AUC was derived for each test from hierarchic summary ROC analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies with 328 patients were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 93% (95% CI 84-97%), 68% (95% CI 60-76%), and 29.29 (95% CI 11.41-75.18) for CEM versus 84% (95% CI 62-95%), 80% (95% CI 71-87%), and 21.39 (95% CI 5.94-77.13) for CE-MRI. The AUC was 0.85 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) for CEM and 0.85 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) for CE-MRI.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of head-to-head comparison studies showed that CEM provides an equivalent diagnostic accuracy to CE-MRI in identification of pCR in breast cancer patients receiving NAT. The results support the increasing use of CEM in this setting and would encourage future studies to validate CEM as a suitable replacement for MRI.

Expanding individualized therapeutic options via genoproteomics

Clinical next-generation sequencing (NGS)² tests have enabled treatment recommendations for cancer patients with driver gene mutations. Targeted therapy options for patients without driver gene mutations are currently unavailable. Herein, we performed NGS and proteomics tests on 169 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE)³ samples of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC, 65),⁴ colorectal cancers (CRC, 61),⁵ thyroid carcinomas (THCA, 14),⁶ gastric cancers (GC, 2),⁷ gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST, 11),⁸ and malignant melanomas (MM, 6).⁹ Of the 169 samples, NGS detected 14 actionable mutated genes in 73 samples, providing treatment options for 43% of the patients. Proteomics identified 61 actionable clinical drug targets approved by the FDA or undergoing clinical trials in 122 samples, providing treatment options for 72% of the patients. In vivo experiments demonstrated that the Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MEK)¹⁰ inhibitor induced the overexpression of MEK1 (Map2k1) to block lung tumor growth in mice. Therefore, protein overexpression is a potentially feasible indicator for guiding targeted therapies. Collectively, our analysis suggests that combining NGS and proteomics (genoproteomics) could expand the targeted treatment options to 85% of cancer patients.

Methodology of the BIOPACT RCT, a Multi-center, Randomized, Non-inferiority Trial Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of Passeo-18 Lux Drug-Coated Balloon (DCB) of Biotronik Compared to the Medtronic IN.PACT Admiral DCB in the Treatment of Subjects with Lesions of the Femoropopliteal Artery

PURPOSE

Although effectiveness and safety of many different paclitaxel coated balloons in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are extensively studied, there is a lack of direct head-to-head comparison studies. To meet this need and to avoid potential "class-effects", the BIOPACT was set up. The purpose is to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the Passeo-18 Lux DCB (Biotronik) for treatment of patients with symptomatic PAD due to femoropopliteal lesions.

METHODS

302 patients are randomized in a 1:1 manner to treatment with either the Passeo-18 Lux DCB or the IN.PACT Admiral DCB (Medtronic) for testing of a formal non-inferiority hypothesis. The participants will be followed for 5 years. The primary efficacy endpoint is freedom from clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) at 12 months, defined as any re-intervention at the target lesion due to symptoms, drop of ankle brachial index (ABI) > 20% or > 0.15 compared to post-procedural ABI. Primary safety endpoint is a composite of freedom from device/procedure-related death through 30 days post-index procedure, freedom from major target limb amputation and clinically-driven target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR) through 12 months post-index procedure. Secondary endpoints can be found at clinicaltrials.gov, ID NCT03884257.

DISCUSSION

As full enrolment was reached by the beginning of September, the investigators expect complete analysis of the primary endpoints by the end of 2022; Meanwhile preliminary results will be disclosed during 2022. As in terms of randomized head-to-head efficacy and safety analysis, this study on paclitaxel coated balloons may provide additional information to clinicians and healthcare providers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03884257 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2, Randomized trial.

Head-to-head performance comparison of self-collected nasal versus professional-collected nasopharyngeal swab for a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended two SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antigen-detecting rapid diagnostics tests (Ag-RDTs), both initially with nasopharyngeal (NP) sample collection. Independent head-to-head studies are necessary for SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT nasal sampling to demonstrate comparability of performance with nasopharyngeal (NP) sampling. We conducted a head-to-head comparison study of a supervised, self-collected nasal mid-turbinate (NMT) swab and a professional-collected NP swab, using the Panbio™ Ag-RDT (distributed by Abbott). We calculated positive and negative percent agreement between the sampling methods as well as sensitivity and specificity for both sampling techniques compared to the reference standard reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). A SARS-CoV-2 infection could be diagnosed by RT-PCR in 45 of 290 participants (15.5%). Comparing the NMT and NP sampling the positive percent agreement of the Ag-RDT was 88.1% (37/42 PCR positives detected; CI 75.0-94.8%). The negative percent agreement was 98.8% (245/248; CI 96.5-99.6%). The overall sensitivity of Panbio with NMT sampling was 84.4% (38/45; CI 71.2-92.3%) and 88.9% (40/45; CI 76.5-95.5%) with NP sampling. Specificity was 99.2% (243/245; CI 97.1-99.8%) for both, NP and NMT sampling. The sensitivity of the Panbio test in participants with high viral load (> 7 log10 SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL) was 96.3% (CI 81.7-99.8%) for both, NMT and NP sampling. For the Panbio supervised NMT self-sampling yields comparable results to NP sampling. This suggests that nasal self-sampling could be used for to enable scaled-up population testing.Clinical Trial DRKS00021220.

The effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod-A comparison of international registry studies

BACKGROUND

Natalizumab and fingolimod were the first preparations recommended for disease breakthrough in priorly treated relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Of three published head-to-head studies two showed that natalizumab is the more effective to prevent relapses and EDSS worsening.

METHODS

By re-analyzing original published results from MSBase, France, and Denmark using uniform methodologies, we aimed at identifying the effects of differences in methodology, in the MS-populations, and at re-evaluating the differences in effectiveness between the two drugs. We gained access to copies of the individual amended databases and pooled all data. We used uniform inclusion/exclusion criteria and statistical methods with Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting.

RESULTS

The pooled analyses comprised 968 natalizumab- and 1479 fingolimod treated patients. The on-treatment natalizumab/fingolimod relapse rate ratio was 0.77 (p=0.004). The hazard ratio (HR) for a first relapse was 0.82 (p=0.030), and the HR for sustained EDSS improvement was 1.4 (p=0.009). There were modest differences between each of the original published studies and the replication study, but the conclusions of the three original studies remained unchanged: in two of them natalizumab was more effective, but in the third there was no difference between natalizumab and fingolimod.

CONCLUSION

The results were largely invariant to the epidemiological and statistical methods but differed between the MS populations. Generally, the advantage of natalizumab was confirmed.

Performance characteristics of five antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 asymptomatic infection: a head-to-head benchmark comparison

Background

Mass testing for early identification and isolation of infectious COVID-19 individuals is efficacious for reducing disease spread. Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) may be suitable for testing strategies; however, benchmark comparisons are scarce.

Methods

We used 286 nasopharyngeal specimens from unexposed asymptomatic individuals collected between December 2020 and January 2021 to assess five Ag-RDTs marketed by Abbott, Siemens, Roche Diagnostics, Lepu Medical, and Surescreen.

Results

For the overall sample, the performance parameters of Ag-RDTs were as follows: Abbott assay, sensitivity 38.6% (95%CI 29.1–48.8) and specificity 99.5% (97–100%); Siemens, sensitivity 51.5% (41.3–61.6) and specificity 98.4% (95.3–99.6); Roche, sensitivity 43.6% (33.7–53.8) and specificity 96.2% (92.4–98.5); Lepu, sensitivity 45.5% (35.6–55.8) and specificity 89.2% (83.8–93.3%); Surescreen, sensitivity 28.8% (20.2–38.6) and specificity 97.8% (94.5–99.4%). For specimens with cycle threshold (Ct) <30 in RT-qPCR, all Ag-RDT achieved a sensitivity ≥70%. The modelled negative- and positive-predictive value for 1% prevalence were >99% and <50%, respectively.

Conclusions

When screening unexposed asymptomatic individuals, two Ag-RDTs achieved sensitivity ≥80% for specimens with Ct<30 and specificity ≥96%. The estimated negative predictive value suggests the suitability of Ag-RDTs for mass screenings of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population.

Comparison of 11 Active Surveillance Protocols in Contemporary European Men Treated With Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare 11 active surveillance (AS) protocols in contemporary European men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analyzed were 3498 RP patients, from 2005 to 2016, who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies and fulfilled at least 1 of 11 examined AS entry definitions. We tested proportions of AS eligibility, ineligibility, presence of primary Gleason 4/5, upstage, and combinations thereof at RP, as well as 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS).

RESULTS

The most and least stringent criteria were very low risk National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Royal Marsden with 18.8% and 96.1% of AS-eligible patients, respectively. Rates of primary Gleason 4/5 at RP, upstaging, or both features, respectively, ranged from 2.3% to 6.7%, 6.1% to 18.2%, and 7.1% to 21.0% for those 2 AS entry definitions. The range of individuals deemed AS-ineligible between the same 2 AS entry definitions, despite not harboring unfavorable pathology (primary Gleason pattern 4/5, upstage, or both), was 80.3% to 3.7%, 78.3% to 3.4%, and 77.8% to 3.4%, respectively. BFS rates showed narrow variability, with a range of 85.9% to 91.8%.

CONCLUSION

Use of stringent AS entry definitions reduces the number of AS-eligible patients, which is related to a select range in individual entry parameters. Moreover, rates of unfavorable pathology at RP as much as tripled between most and least stringent AS entry definitions. However, less stringent AS entry definitions result in the lowest AS-ineligibility rates, in men without unfavorable pathology. BFS rates were virtually invariably high. Clinicians should know differences in key parameters underlying each AS entry definition, associated effect on rates of eligibility, and potential misclassification of individuals.