Although, much progress has been made in our understanding of DC ontogeny and function, the transcriptional regulation of DC lineage commitment and functional specialization in vivo is poorly understood. We performed a comprehensive comparative analysis of CD8+, CD103+, CD11b+, and plasmacytoid DC subsets and the recently identified Macrophage DC precursors and Common DC precursors across the entire immune system. Here we characterize candidate transcriptional activators involved in myeloid progenitor commitment to the DC lineage and predicted regulators of DC functional diversity in tissues. We identify a molecular signature that distinguishes tissue DC from macrophages. We also identify a transcriptional program expressed specifically during steady-state tissue DC migration to the draining lymph nodes that may control tolerance to self-tissue antigens.

SUMMARY Variability in induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines remains a concern for disease modeling and regenerative medicine. We have used RNA sequencing analysis and linear mixed models to examine the sources of gene expression variability in 317 human iPSC lines from 101 individuals. We found that ~50% of genome-wide expression variability is explained by variation across individuals and identified a set of expression quantitative trait loci that contribute to this variation. These analyses coupled with allele specific expression show that iPSCs retain a donor specific gene expression pattern. Network, pathway and key driver analyses showed that Polycomb targets contribute significantly to the non-genetic variability seen within and across individuals, highlighting this chromatin regulator as a likely source of reprogramming-based variability. Our findings therefore shed light on variation between iPSC lines and illustrate the potential for our dataset and other similar large-scale analyses to identify underlying drivers relevant to iPSC applications.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of individuals and caused hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide. Predicting mortality among patients with COVID-19 who present with a spectrum of complications is very difficult, hindering the prognostication and management of the disease. We aimed to develop an accurate prediction model of COVID-19 mortality using unbiased computational methods, and identify the clinical features most predictive of this outcome. Methods In this prediction model development and validation study, we applied machine learning techniques to clinical data from a large cohort of patients with COVID-19 treated at the Mount Sinai Health System in New York City, NY, USA, to predict mortality. We analysed patient-level data captured in the Mount Sinai Data Warehouse database for individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 who had a health system encounter between March 9 and April 6, 2020. For initial analyses, we used patient data from March 9 to April 5, and randomly assigned (80:20) the patients to the development dataset or test dataset 1 (retrospective). Patient data for those with encounters on April 6, 2020, were used in test dataset 2 (prospective). We designed prediction models based on clinical features and patient characteristics during health system encounters to predict mortality using the development dataset. We assessed the resultant models in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) score in the test datasets. Findings Using the development dataset (n=3841) and a systematic machine learning framework, we developed a COVID-19 mortality prediction model that showed high accuracy (AUC=0·91) when applied to test datasets of retrospective (n=961) and prospective (n=249) patients. This model was based on three clinical features: patient's age, minimum oxygen saturation over the course of their medical encounter, and type of patient encounter (inpatient vs outpatient and telehealth visits). Interpretation An accurate and parsimonious COVID-19 mortality prediction model based on three features might have utility in clinical settings to guide the management and prognostication of patients affected by this disease. External validation of this prediction model in other populations is needed. Funding National Institutes of Health.

IMPORTANCE Mammography screening currently relies on subjective human interpretation. Artificial intelligence (AI) advances could be used to increase mammography screening accuracy by reducing missed cancers and false positives. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether AI can overcome human mammography interpretation limitations with a rigorous, unbiased evaluation of machine learning algorithms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this diagnostic accuracy study conducted between September 2016 and November 2017, an international, crowdsourced challenge was hosted to foster AI algorithm development focused on interpreting screening mammography. More than 1100 participants comprising 126 teams from 44 countries participated. Analysis began November 18, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASUREMENTS Algorithms used images alone (challenge 1) or combined images, previous examinations (if available), and clinical and demographic risk factor data (challenge 2) and output a score that translated to cancer yes/no within 12 months. Algorithm accuracy for breast cancer detection was evaluated using area under the curve and algorithm specificity compared with radiologists' specificity with radiologists' sensitivity set at 85.9% (United States) and 83.9% (Sweden). An ensemble method aggregating top-performing AI algorithms and radiologists' recall assessment was developed and evaluated. RESULTS Overall, 144 231 screening mammograms from 85 580 US women (952 cancer positive Յ12 months from screening) were used for algorithm training and validation. A second independent validation cohort included 166 578 examinations from 68 008 Swedish women (780 cancer positive). The top-performing algorithm achieved an area under the curve of 0.858 (United States) and 0.903 (Sweden) and 66.2% (United States) and 81.2% (Sweden) specificity at the radiologists' sensitivity, lower than community-practice radiologists' specificity of 90.5% (United States) and 98.5% (Sweden). Combining top-performing algorithms and US radiologist assessments resulted in a higher area under the curve of 0.942 and achieved a significantly improved specificity (92.0%) at the same sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE While no single AI algorithm outperformed radiologists, an ensemble of AI algorithms combined with radiologist assessment in a single-reader screening environment improved overall accuracy. This study underscores the potential of using machine (continued)

Ruane et al. demonstrate a role for the microbiota in modulating protective immunity to intranasal vaccination via the ability of lung dendritic cells to induce B cell IgA class switching.