The aspergilli comprise a diverse group of filamentous fungi spanning over 200 million years of evolution. Here we report the genome sequence of the model organism Aspergillus nidulans, and a comparative study with Aspergillus fumigatus, a serious human pathogen, and Aspergillus oryzae, used in the production of sake, miso and soy sauce. Our analysis of genome structure provided a quantitative evaluation of forces driving long-term eukaryotic genome evolution. It also led to an experimentally validated model of mating-type locus evolution, suggesting the potential for sexual reproduction in A. fumigatus and A. oryzae. Our analysis of sequence conservation revealed over 5,000 non-coding regions actively conserved across all three species. Within these regions, we identified potential functional elements including a previously uncharacterized TPP riboswitch and motifs suggesting regulation in filamentous fungi by Puf family genes. We further obtained comparative and experimental evidence indicating widespread translational regulation by upstream open reading frames. These results enhance our understanding of these widely studied fungi as well as provide new insight into eukaryotic genome evolution and gene regulation.The aspergilli are a ubiquitous group of filamentous fungi spanning over 200 million years of evolution. Among the over 185 aspergilli are several that have an impact on human health and society, including 20 human pathogens as well as beneficial species used to produce foodstuffs and industrial enzymes 1 . Within this genus, A. nidulans has a central role as a model organism. In contrast to most aspergilli, A. nidulans possesses a well-characterized sexual cycle and thus a well-developed genetics system. Half a century of A. nidulans research has advanced the study of eukaryotic cellular physiology, contributing to our understanding of metabolic regulation, development, cell cycle control, chromatin structure, cytoskeletal function, DNA repair, pH control, morphogenesis, mitochondrial DNA structure and human genetic diseases.We present here the genome sequence for A. nidulans, and a comparative genomics study with two related aspergilli: A. fumigatus 2 and A. oryzae 3 . A. fumigatus is a life-threatening human pathogen, and ARTICLES
The translation of genome sequencing into routine health care has been slow, partly because of concerns about affordability. The aspirational cost of sequencing a genome is $1000, but there is little evidence to support this estimate. We estimate the cost of using genome sequencing in routine clinical care in patients with cancer or rare diseases. Methods: We performed a microcosting study of Illumina-based genome sequencing in a UK National Health Service laboratory processing 399 samples/year. Cost data were collected for all steps in the sequencing pathway, including bioinformatics analysis and reporting of results. Sensitivity analysis identified key cost drivers. Results: Genome sequencing costs £6841 per cancer case (comprising matched tumor and germline samples) and £7050 per rare disease case (three samples). The consumables used during sequencing are the most expensive component of testing (68-72% of the total cost). Equipment costs are higher for rare disease cases, whereas consumable and staff costs are slightly higher for cancer cases. Conclusion: The cost of genome sequencing is underestimated if only sequencing costs are considered, and likely surpasses $1000/ genome in a single laboratory. This aspirational sequencing cost will likely only be achieved if consumable costs are considerably reduced and sequencing is performed at scale.
A significant proportion of patients presenting for surgery have experienced a previous cancellation for the same procedure. Cancer surgery is relatively protected, but bed capacity, including postoperative critical care requirements, are significant risk factors for previous cancellations.
Background:The medical, health service, societal and economic impact of the COVID-19 emergency has unknown effects on overall population mortality. Previous models of population mortality are based on death over days among infected people, nearly all of whom (to date at least) have underlying conditions. Models have not incorporated information on high risk conditions or their longer term background (pre-COVID-19) mortality. We estimated the excess number of deaths over 1 year under different COVID-19 incidence rates and differing mortality impacts. Methods:Using population based linked primary and secondary care electronic health records in England (HDR UK -CALIBER), we report the prevalence of underlying conditions defined by UK Public Health England COVID-19 guidelines (16 March 2020) in 3,862,012 individuals aged ≥30 years from 1997-2017. We used previously validated phenotypes, openly available (https://caliberresearch.org/portal), for each condition using ICD-10 diagnosis, Read, procedure and medication codes. We estimated the 1-year mortality in each condition, and developed simple models of excess COVID-19-related deaths assuming relative risk (RR) of the impact of the emergency (compared to background mortality) of 1.2, 1.5 and 2.0. Rapid communication 22/3/20202 Findings: 20.0% of the population are at risk according to current PHE guidelines, of which; 13.7% were age>70 years and 6.3% aged ≤70 years with ≥1 underlying condition (cardiovascular disease (2.3%), diabetes (2.2%), steroid therapy (1.9%), severe obesity (0.9%), chronic kidney disease (0.6%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, COPD (0.5%). Multimorbidity (co-occurrence of ≥2 conditions in an individual) was common (10.1%). The 1-year mortality in the at-risk population was 4.46%, and age and underlying conditions combine to influence background risk, varying markedly across conditions (5.9% in age>70 years, 8.6% for COPD and 13.1% in those with ≥3 or more conditions). In a suppression scenario (at SARS CoV2 rates of 0.001% of the UK population), there would be minimal excess deaths (3 and 7 excess deaths at relative risk, RR, 1.5 and 2.0 respectively).At SARS CoV2 rates of 10% of the UK population (mitigation) the model estimates the numbers of excess deaths as: 13791, 34479 and 68957 (at RR 1.2, 1.5 and 2.0 respectively).At SARS CoV2 rates of 80% in the UK population ("do-nothing"), the model estimates the number of excess deaths as 110332, 275,830 and 551,659 (at RR 1.2, 1.5 and 2.0) respectively. Interpretation:We provide the public, researchers and policy makers a simple model to estimate the excess mortality over 1 year from COVID-19, based on underlying conditions at different ages. If the relative mortality impact of COVID-19 were to be about 20% (similar magnitude as the established winter vs summer mortality excess), then the excess deaths would be 0 when 1 in 100 000 (suppression), 13791 when 1 in 10 (mitigation) and 110332 when 8 in 10 are infected ("do nothing") scenario. However, the relative impact of COVID-19 is unknown....
Key Points Question Which deteriorating ward patients benefit from intensive care unit transfer? Findings This analysis of a cohort study of 4596 deteriorating ward patients used an instrumental variable approach to evaluate estimates of person-centered effects of ICU transfer and mortality. This study found an increased risk reduction in 28-day mortality in patients transferred to ICU who were older than 75 years and had greater illness severity (National Early Warning Scores >6). Meaning The instrumental variable approach in this study found that benefits of intensive care unit transfer may increase with age and baseline physiology score.
Background Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) are used to triage primary care patients with symptoms that could be caused by colorectal cancer for referral to colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether combining FIT with routine blood test results could improve the performance of FIT in the primary care setting. Methods Results of all consecutive FITs requested by primary care providers between March 2017 and December 2020 were retrieved from the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Demographic factors (age, sex), reason for referral, and results of blood tests within 90 days were also retrieved. Patients were followed up for incident colorectal cancer in linked hospital records. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of FIT alone, FIT paired with blood test results, and several multivariable FIT models, were compared. Results One hundred thirty-nine colorectal cancers were diagnosed (0.8%). Sensitivity and specificity of FIT alone at a threshold of 10 μg Hb/g were 92.1 and 91.5% respectively. Compared to FIT alone, blood test results did not improve the performance of FIT. Pairing blood test results with FIT increased specificity but decreased sensitivity. Multivariable models including blood tests performed similarly to FIT alone. Conclusions FIT is a highly sensitive tool for identifying higher risk individuals presenting to primary care with lower risk symptoms. Combining blood test results with FIT does not appear to lead to better discrimination for colorectal cancer than using FIT alone.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.