Structural refuges within which prey can escape from predators can be an important limiting resource for the prey. In a manner that resembles the childhood game of musical chairs, many prey species rapidly retreat to shared, unguarded refuges whenever a predator threatens, and only when refuges are relatively abundant do all prey individuals actually escape. The key feature of this process is that the per capita prey mortality rate depends on the ratio of prey individuals to refuges. We introduce a new class of mortality functions with this feature and then demonstrate statistically that they describe field mortality data from a well-studied coral reef fish species, the Caribbean bridled goby Coryphopterus glaucofraenum, substantially better than do several mortality functions of more conventional form.

Background

With the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in the United States, visits for skin infections greatly increased. Staphylococci and streptococci are considered predominant causes of wound infections. Clindamycin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) are commonly prescribed, but the efficacy of TMP-SMX has been questioned.

Methods

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, superiority trial at 5 US emergency departments. Patients >12 years of age with an uncomplicated wound infection received oral clindamycin 300 mg 4 times daily or TMP-SMX 320 mg/1600 mg twice daily, each for 7 days. We compared the primary outcome, wound infection cure at 7-14 days, and secondary outcomes through 6-8 weeks after treatment, in the per-protocol population.

Results

Subjects had a median age of 40 years (range, 14-76 years); 40.1% of wound specimens grew MRSA, 25.7% methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, and 5.0% streptococci. The wound infection was cured at 7-14 days in 187 of 203 (92.1%) clindamycin-treated and 182 of 198 (91.9%) TMP-SMX-treated subjects (difference, 0.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.8% to 6.2%; P = not significant). The clindamycin group had a significantly lower rate of recurrence at 7-14 days (1.5% vs 6.6%; difference, -5.1%; 95% CI, -9.4% to -.8%) and through 6-8 weeks following treatment (2.0% vs 7.1%; difference, -5.1%; 95% CI, -9.7% to -.6%). Other secondary outcomes were statistically similar between groups but tended to favor clindamycin. Adverse event rates were similar.

Conclusions

In settings where MRSA is prevalent, clindamycin and TMP-SMX produce similar cure and adverse event rates among patients with an uncomplicated wound infection. Further study evaluating differential effects of antibiotics on recurrent infection may be warranted.

Clinical trials registration

NCT00729937.

Background

U.S. emergency department visits for cutaneous abscess have increased with the emergence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The role of antibiotics for patients with a drained abscess is unclear.

Methods

We conducted a randomized trial at five U.S. emergency departments to determine whether trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (at doses of 320 mg and 1600 mg, respectively, twice daily, for 7 days) would be superior to placebo in outpatients older than 12 years of age who had an uncomplicated abscess that was being treated with drainage. The primary outcome was clinical cure of the abscess, assessed 7 to 14 days after the end of the treatment period.

Results

The median age of the participants was 35 years (range, 14 to 73); 45.3% of the participants had wound cultures that were positive for MRSA. In the modified intention-to-treat population, clinical cure of the abscess occurred in 507 of 630 participants (80.5%) in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group versus 454 of 617 participants (73.6%) in the placebo group (difference, 6.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1 to 11.7; P=0.005). In the per-protocol population, clinical cure occurred in 487 of 524 participants (92.9%) in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group versus 457 of 533 participants (85.7%) in the placebo group (difference, 7.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.2 to 11.2; P<0.001). Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was superior to placebo with respect to most secondary outcomes in the per-protocol population, resulting in lower rates of subsequent surgical drainage procedures (3.4% vs. 8.6%; difference, -5.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.2 to -2.2), skin infections at new sites (3.1% vs. 10.3%; difference, -7.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -10.4 to -4.1), and infections in household members (1.7% vs. 4.1%; difference, -2.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.6 to -0.2) 7 to 14 days after the treatment period. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was associated with slightly more gastrointestinal side effects (mostly mild) than placebo. At 7 to 14 days after the treatment period, invasive infections had developed in 2 of 524 participants (0.4%) in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group and in 2 of 533 participants (0.4%) in the placebo group; at 42 to 56 days after the treatment period, an invasive infection had developed in 1 participant (0.2%) in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group.

Conclusions

In settings in which MRSA was prevalent, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole treatment resulted in a higher cure rate among patients with a drained cutaneous abscess than placebo. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00729937.).

BACKGROUND: Protection against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) can limit transmission and the risk of post-COVID conditions, and is particularly important among healthcare personnel. However, lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) has been reported since predominance of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. METHODS: We evaluated the VE of a monovalent messenger RNA (mRNA) booster dose against COVID-19 from October 2021 to June 2022 among US healthcare personnel. After matching case-participants with COVID-19 to control-participants by 2-week period and site, we used conditional logistic regression to estimate the VE of a booster dose compared with completing only 2 mRNA doses >150 days previously, adjusted for multiple covariates. RESULTS: Among 3279 case-participants and 3998 control-participants who had completed 2 mRNA doses, we estimated that the VE of a booster dose against COVID-19 declined from 86% (95% confidence interval, 81%-90%) during Delta predominance to 65% (58%-70%) during Omicron predominance. During Omicron predominance, VE declined from 73% (95% confidence interval, 67%-79%) 14-60 days after the booster dose, to 32% (4%-52%) ≥120 days after a booster dose. We found that VE was similar by age group, presence of underlying health conditions, and pregnancy status on the test date, as well as among immunocompromised participants. CONCLUSIONS: A booster dose conferred substantial protection against COVID-19 among healthcare personnel. However, VE was lower during Omicron predominance, and waning effectiveness was observed 4 months after booster dose receipt during this period. Our findings support recommendations to stay up to date on recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccines for all those eligible.

Rationale

Asymptomatic relatives of patients with familial interstitial pneumonia (FIP), the inherited form of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, carry increased risk for developing interstitial lung disease.

Objectives

Studying these at-risk individuals provides a unique opportunity to investigate early stages of FIP pathogenesis and develop predictive models of disease onset.

Methods

Seventy-five asymptomatic first-degree relatives of FIP patients (mean age, 50.8 yr) underwent blood sampling and high-resolution chest computed tomography (HRCT) scanning in an ongoing cohort study; 72 consented to bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and transbronchial biopsies. Twenty-seven healthy individuals were used as control subjects.

Measurements and main results

Eleven of 75 at-risk subjects (14%) had evidence of interstitial changes by HRCT, whereas 35.2% had abnormalities on transbronchial biopsies. No differences were noted in inflammatory cells in BAL between at-risk individuals and control subjects. At-risk subjects had increased herpesvirus DNA in cell-free BAL and evidence of herpesvirus antigen expression in alveolar epithelial cells (AECs), which correlated with expression of endoplasmic reticulum stress markers in AECs. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell and AEC telomere length were shorter in at-risk individuals than healthy control subjects. The minor allele frequency of the Muc5B rs35705950 promoter polymorphism was increased in at-risk subjects. Levels of several plasma biomarkers differed between at-risk subjects and control subjects, and correlated with abnormal HRCT scans.

Conclusions

Evidence of lung parenchymal remodeling and epithelial dysfunction was identified in asymptomatic individuals at risk for FIP. Together, these findings offer new insights into the early pathogenesis of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia and provide an ongoing opportunity to characterize presymptomatic abnormalities that predict progression to clinical disease.

We performed a genome-wide association study of non-Hispanic, white individuals with fibrotic idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs; n = 1,616) and controls (n = 4,683), with follow-up replication analyses in 876 cases and 1,890 controls. We confirmed association with TERT at 5p15, MUC5B at 11p15 and the 3q26 region near TERC, and we identified seven newly associated loci (Pmeta = 2.4 × 10(-8) to 1.1 × 10(-19)), including FAM13A (4q22), DSP (6p24), OBFC1 (10q24), ATP11A (13q34), DPP9 (19p13) and chromosomal regions 7q22 and 15q14-15. Our results suggest that genes involved in host defense, cell-cell adhesion and DNA repair contribute to risk of fibrotic IIPs.

Study objective

Among a comprehensive range of frontline emergency department health care personnel, we assessed symptoms of anxiety and burnout, specific coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) work-related stressors, and risk for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We also determined whether COVID-19 serologic testing of HCP decreased their self-reported anxiety.

Methods

In a prospective cohort study from May 13, 2020, to July 8, 2020, we used electronic surveys to capture participant self-reported symptoms before and after serologic testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies. Participants were physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers, and nonclinical ED personnel at 20 geographically diverse United States EDs. We evaluated these domains: 1) the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on overall stress and anxiety; 2) COVID-19-related work stressors; 3) burnout; and 4) PTSD risk (measured using the Primary Care-PTSD Screen for DSM-5, a 5-item screening instrument in which a score of ≥3 signifies high risk for PTSD). We also assessed perceptions of whether results of COVID-19 antibody testing decreased participants' self-reported anxiety.

Results

Of 1,606 participants, 100% and 88% responded to the baseline and follow-up surveys, respectively. At baseline, approximately half (46%) reported symptoms of emotional exhaustion and burnout from their work, and 308 (19.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17.3% to 21.1%) respondents screened positive for increased PTSD risk. Female respondents were more likely than males to screen positive (odds ratio [OR] 2.03, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.78). Common concerns included exposing their family and the health of coworkers diagnosed with COVID-19. After receiving antibody test results, 54% (95% CI 51.8 to 56.7) somewhat agreed, agreed, or strongly agreed that knowledge of their immune status had decreased their anxiety. A positive serology result indicating prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a higher likelihood of reporting decreased anxiety (2.83, 95% CI 1.37 to 5.83).

Conclusion

Symptoms of anxiety and burnout were prevalent across the spectrum of ED staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. One-fifth of ED personnel appeared to be at risk for PTSD. Increased provision of serologic testing may help to mitigate anxiety.

Rationale: Several common and rare genetic variants have been associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a progressive fibrotic condition that is localized to the lung. Objectives: To develop an integrated understanding of the rare and common variants located in multiple loci that have been reported to contribute to the risk of disease. Methods: We performed deep targeted resequencing (3.69 Mb of DNA) in cases (n = 3,624) and control subjects (n = 4,442) across genes and regions previously associated with disease. We tested for associations between disease and 1) individual common variants via logistic regression and 2) groups of rare variants via sequence kernel association tests. Measurements and Main Results: Statistically significant common variant association signals occurred in all 10 of the regions chosen based on genome-wide association studies. The strongest risk variant is the MUC5B promoter variant rs35705950, with an odds ratio of 5.45 (95% confidence interval, 4.91-6.06) for one copy of the risk allele and 18.68 (95% confidence interval, 13.34-26.17) for two copies of the risk allele (P = 9.60 × 10^-295). In addition to identifying for the first time that rare variation in FAM13A is associated with disease, we confirmed the role of rare variation in the TERT and RTEL1 gene regions in the risk of IPF, and found that the FAM13A and TERT regions have independent common and rare variant signals. Conclusions: A limited number of common and rare variants contribute to the risk of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in each of the resequencing regions, and these genetic variants focus on biological mechanisms of host defense and cell senescence.

Rationale: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a rare, irreversible, and progressive disease of the lungs. Common genetic variants, in addition to nongenetic factors, have been consistently associated with IPF. Rare variants identified by candidate gene, family-based, and exome studies have also been reported to associate with IPF. However, the extent to which rare variants, genome-wide, may contribute to the risk of IPF remains unknown. Objectives: We used whole-genome sequencing to investigate the role of rare variants, genome-wide, on IPF risk. Methods: As part of the Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine Program, we sequenced 2,180 cases of IPF. Association testing focused on the aggregated effect of rare variants (minor allele frequency ⩽0.01) within genes or regions. We also identified individual rare variants that are influential within genes and estimated the heritability of IPF on the basis of rare and common variants. Measurements and Main Results: Rare variants in both TERT and RTEL1 were significantly associated with IPF. A single rare variant in each of the TERT and RTEL1 genes was found to consistently influence the aggregated test statistics. There was no significant evidence of association with other previously reported rare variants. The SNP heritability of IPF was estimated to be 32% (SE = 3%). Conclusions: Rare variants within the TERT and RTEL1 genes and well-established common variants have the largest contribution to IPF risk overall. Efforts in risk profiling or the development of therapies for IPF that focus on TERT, RTEL1, common variants, and environmental risk factors are likely to have the largest impact on this complex disease.

Objectives

To determine the association of prior use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) with mortality and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Design

Retrospective observational study.

Setting

Multicenter, international COVID-19 registry.

Subjects

Adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients on antihypertensive agents (AHAs) prior to admission, admitted from March 31, 2020, to March 10, 2021.

Interventions

None.

Measurements and main results

Data were compared between three groups: patients on RAASIs only, other AHAs only, and those on both medications. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were performed after controlling for prehospitalization characteristics to estimate the effect of RAASIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization. Of 26,652 patients, 7,975 patients were on AHAs prior to hospitalization. Of these, 1,542 patients (19.3%) were on RAASIs only, 3,765 patients (47.2%) were on other AHAs only, and 2,668 (33.5%) patients were on both medications. Compared with those taking other AHAs only, patients on RAASIs only were younger (mean age 63.3 vs 66.9 yr; p < 0.0001), more often male (58.2% vs 52.4%; p = 0.0001) and more often White (55.1% vs 47.2%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, race, location, and comorbidities, patients on combination of RAASIs and other AHAs had higher in-hospital mortality than those on RAASIs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI [1.19-1.38]; p < 0.0001) and higher mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 1.09; 95% CI [1.03-1.15]; p = 0.0017). Patients on RAASIs only had lower mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94]; p = 0.0003). Patients on ACEIs only had higher mortality compared with those on ARBs only (OR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.20-1.56]; p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were taking AHAs, prior use of a combination of RAASIs and other AHAs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than the use of RAASIs alone. When compared with ARBs, ACEIs were associated with significantly higher mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.