Activity

Plants in the flowering stage need to ensure reproduction by protecting themselves from attack and by preserving interactions with mutualist pollinators. When different plant mutualists are using the same type of cues, such as volatile compounds, attraction of parasitoids and pollinators may trade off. To explore this, we compared volatile emission of Brassica nigra plants in response to single or dual attack on their inflorescences. Additionally, we recorded flower visitation by pollinators and the attraction of parasitoids in the greenhouse and/or field. Brassica nigra were exposed in the flowering stage to one or two of the following three attackers Brevicoryne brassicae aphids, Pieris brassicae caterpillars, and Xanthomonas campestris pv. raphani bacteria. We found that single attack by caterpillars, and dual attack by caterpillars plus aphids, induced the strongest changes in plant volatile emission. The caterpillars’ parasitoid C. glomerata did not exhibit preference for plants exposed to caterpillars only vs. plants exposed to caterpillars plus aphids or plus bacteria. However, the composition of the pollinator community associated with flowers of B. nigra was affected by plant exposure to the attackers, but the total number of pollinators visiting the plants did not change upon attack. We conclude that, when B. nigra were exposed to single or dual attack on their inflorescences, the plants maintained interactions with natural enemies of the insect attackers and with pollinators. We discuss how chemical diversity may contribute to plant resilience upon attack.Partnered gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) are less likely to engage in HIV and STI testing. We enrolled 51 male couples from a larger study of home HIV testing to test the feasibility of a dyadic home STI testing intervention delivered via telehealth, consisting of two telehealth sessions delivered via video-chat. In the first session, an interventionist demonstrated the specimen collection kits. In the second session, an interventionist delivered the STI results. Participants reported very high levels of acceptability of the intervention 92% reported the telehealth calls quality as very good, 99% reported the sample collection instructions were clear, and 96% of respondents returned specimens for collection. 9% of participants tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea, and all were linked to care. The intervention has the potential to surmount economic, physical and stigma-related barriers to attending clinics for STI testing, but these results need to be further tested in more diverse samples of male couples.Background The CXCR4 chemokine receptor promotes tumor survival through mechanisms that include suppressing antitumor immune responses. Mavorixafor (X4P-001) is an oral, selective, allosteric CXCR4 inhibitor that decreases the recruitment of immunosuppressive cells into the tumor microenvironment and increases activated cytotoxic Tcell infiltration. Methods Patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) unresponsive to nivolumab monotherapy received oral mavorixafor 400 mg daily plus 240 mg intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks. Results Nine patients were enrolled, median age 65 years. At baseline 4 had progressive disease (PD) and 5 had stable disease (SD). One of 5 patients with SD at study entry on prior nivolumab monotherapy had a partial response (PR) on combination treatment; all 4 patients with PD at study entry had a best response of SD with the combination treatment (median duration 6.7 months; range 3.7-14.7). Four patients discontinued therapy due to treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Tariquidar cost Grade ≥ 3 drug-related AEs were elevated alanine and aspartate aminotransferase (2 patients each); and autoimmune hepatitis, chronic kidney disease, increased lipase, maculopapular rash, and mucosal inflammation (1 patient each). A robust increase in levels of chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 9 CXCL9 on mavorixafor appeared to correlate with clinical benefit. Conclusions The CXCR4 inhibition mediated by mavorixafor, in combination with PD-1 blockade to enhance antitumor immune responses in patients unresponsive to checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy, is worthy of further study. Mavorixafor and nivolumab combination therapy in patients with advanced ccRCC demonstrated potential antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02923531. Date of registration October 04, 2016.

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is higher than most other hospitalized patients. Nonadministration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is common and is associated with VTE events. Our objective was to determine whether nonadministration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is more common in patients with COVID-19 versus other hospitalized patients.

In this retrospective cohort analysis of all adult patients discharged from the Johns hopkins hospital between Mar 1 and May 12, 2020, we compared demographic, clinical characteristics, VTE outcomes, prescription and administration of VTE prophylaxis between COVID-19 positive, negative, and not tested groups.

Patients tested positive for COVID-19 were significantly older, and more likely to be Hispanic, have a higher median body mass index, have longer hospital length of stay, require mechanical ventilation, develop pulmonary embolism and die (all p < 0.001). COVID-19 patients were more likely to be prescribed (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.38-1.66) and receive all doses of prescribed pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.36-1.62). The number of patients who missed at least one dose of VTE prophylaxis and developed VTE was similar between the three groups (p = 0.31).

It is unlikely that high rates of VTE in COVID-19 are due to nonadministration of doses of pharmacologic prophylaxis. Hence, we should prioritize research into alternative approaches to optimizing VTE prevention in patients with COVID-19.

It is unlikely that high rates of VTE in COVID-19 are due to nonadministration of doses of pharmacologic prophylaxis. Hence, we should prioritize research into alternative approaches to optimizing VTE prevention in patients with COVID-19.