14,839 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2018
    1. On 2017 Dec 15, Helge Knüttel commented:

      This is a very nice and helpful work based on a broad empirical basis. It will have an impact on my future searching for systematic reviews.

      The autors' main conclusion is that at least the databases/search engines Embase, MEDLINE (incl. ahead-of-print publications), Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar should be used for searching in a systematic review (plus some more depending on the topic). However, there is no data in the article what content contained in Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection contributed to the search results analyzed in the article. Therefore, it is not clear what content of Wos Core Collection the authors' recommendation relates to.

      Web of Science Core Collection is a brand name for, well, a collection of databases. Currently, there are at least six citation indexes (Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Arts & Humanities Citation Index, Emerging Sources Citation Index, Book Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index) and two chemical indexes (Current Chemical Reactions, Index Chemicus) sold under the general term Web of Science Core Collection. These may contribute to relevant search results in highly varying degrees depending on the research question. This is of relevance as the set of databases accessible to a subscribing institution is not fixed. Rather, it is "You get what you pay for." In addition and unlike other databases a running subscription to one of the citation indexes will not give access to content from all previous years. "Archive" content will need to be purchased separately. As a result, the term "Web of Science Core Collection" may stand for a very broad range of database content.

      It would be helpful if the authors could specify what WoS content their analysis and recommendation relates to.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 13, Xiangbing Meng commented:

      I highly recommend readers to further read the following two references. Xiangbing Meng

      Induction of mitotic cell death by overriding G2/M checkpoint in endometrial cancer cells with non-functional p53. Meng X, Laidler LL, Kosmacek EA, Yang S, Xiong Z, Zhu D, Wang X, Dai D, Zhang Y, Wang X, Brachova P, Albitar L, Liu D, Ianzini F, Mackey MA, Leslie KK. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Mar;128(3):461-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.11.004. Epub 2012 Nov 9. PMID:23146687 PMCID:PMC3612022

      Strategies for Molecularly Enhanced Chemotherapy to Achieve Synthetic Lethality in Endometrial Tumors with Mutant p53. Meng X, Dizon DS, Yang S, Wang X, Zhu D, Thiel KW, Leslie KK. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2013;2013:828165. doi: 10.1155/2013/828165. Epub 2013 Dec 7. PMID 24381593 PMCID: PMC3871910


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 04, Anthony Michael commented:

      This paper tackles an interesting problem: whether Salmonella needs to be able to N-acetylate the polyamines spermidine or spermine for successful intracellular replication in human cells. Acetylation of endogenous spermidine in Salmonella might be required to prevent excess/ deleterious accumulation of spermidine. Acetylation by Salmonella of host-derived spermine might detoxify a potentially physiologically disruptive metabolite.

        Until this paper, the tetraamine spermine has never been reproducibly detected in Enterobacteria, however, the authors find that spermine is present in Salmonella at 8.0 mM and is 40 times more abundant than spermidine in Salmonella cells. Such a high molar ratio of spermine to spermidine has never been found in any organism, not even in seminal fluid, where spermine phosphate is sufficiently concentrated to result in some crystallization. This is an extraordinary discovery if reproducible, although it is more likely that some technical problem lies at the heart of this unique finding.
      
         It should be noted that the authors grew the Salmonella in LB medium, a rich, putrescine- and spermidine-containing medium. To determine the native polyamines of a given bacterial species, it is necessary to grow the bacterium in polyamine-free, chemically-defined medium because most bacteria can take up polyamines from the environment. There is barely detectable spermine in LB medium, and so the presence of spermine at 8 mM is all the more remarkable (this is likely a higher concentration of spermine than found in the human host cells, which have a dedicated spermine synthase not found in Salmonella). I suggest the authors use LC-MS to detect the mass of tetrabenzoylated spermine in their benzoylated extracts of Salmonella. Finally, the authors have not demonstrated that the spermidine N-acetyltransferase (speG) gene deletion results in any change in N-acetylspermidine levels. As the Salmonella speG protein has not been previously biochemically characterized, it would be prudent to seek orthogonal proof that the changes ascribed to the speG gene deletion are due to its enzymatic activity as a spermidine N-acetyltransferase. If spermine is reproducibly found to be present in Salmonella at 8.0 mM, I am more than happy to admit that everything that I know is wrong.
      


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 07, Peter Rogan commented:

      We have analyzed this mutation with the Automated Splice Site and Exon Definition Analysis server (ASSEDA). The 1 nt deletion in the splice donor of exon 20 reduces the strength of this site from 11.5 -> 4.1 bits. (100/[2<sup>7.4</sup> bits] = 0.6% binding affinity)

      The information theory-based approach used in ASSEDA predicts isoform abundance and computes the fold changes in binding affinity from mutations (Mucaki EJ, 2013), which corresponds to the degree of exon skipping in this case. The reduction in splice site strength is much greater than the estimates given by the ad hoc methods used in the paper. LOH was not complete; some of the observed expression may have been derived from the contaminating normal allele. In fact, had the loss of function in splice site recognition only been 25-40% according to the paper, it could have been classified as a variant of unknown significance, or possibly as benign (as we suggested in Mucaki EJ, 2011).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 01, Tim Mathes commented:

      We thank Maria-Inti Metzendorf for her comments. We wrote that 2 full-texts were unavailable. By unavailable we mean that the full-text was not available anywhere. For sure, we tried to obtain all articles also via a document delivery services or by contacting the study authors. We assumed that it is not necessary to mention all sources that were used for obtaining full-texts. We chose the term not available, instead of not obtainable because one can never be 100% certain that a full-text don’t exist anywhere. The two mentioned cases were abstracts from the Cochrane Colloquium that were very likely never published as full-texts at the time point of the search. The abstracts did not provide sufficient information to allow an adequate data extraction. The studies were therefore excluded. Both authors are experienced in developing search strategies. Moreover, we tested the search strategy by checking whether the relevant publications known to us were identified before conducting the search (see article Methods section). In the comment no studies are mentioned that were missed by our search strategy. Therefore, it is only an assumption that the search strategy is not sensitive. We suppose this idea has come up because we only used “systematic”sb. In our experience this subset strategy is very sensitive. Our experience has also shown that this subset strategy is even more sensitive than some of the validated search filters for systematic reviews (e.g. health-evidence.ca filter: https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-51). It might be always argued that sensitivity could be further increased. However, scientific manpower is not inexhaustible. So, in our opinion also precision of the search strategy is an important feature. However, we welcome suggestions on how to improve our search strategy, although we are confident that our search strategy is sufficient and did retrieve all relevant studies. We also appreciate comments or suggestions for studies we might have missed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2018 Jan 24, Maria-Inti Metzendorf commented:

      I would like to congratulate the authors on preparing a methodological review on the important topic of data extraction methods in systematic reviews (SR). They report that 11 potentially relevant articles were identfied in the screening process. After full-text evaluation 3 articles were excluded because they did not meet eligiblity criteria, and further 2 articles were excluded as the full-text was not available. Therefore, the authors could only base their analysis on 6 studies and conclude that the evidence base to inform the review´s question is sparse. Given this conclusion I wonder why the authors did not acquire the full-text of the above mentioned 2 articles (via document delivery services or by contacting the authors), as these could have further informed their review. In addition, the review would also have benefited from involving an information specialist who could have checked the search and improved its sensitivity.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 30, Israel Hanukoglu commented:

      Some images from this article has been included in the "Beauty of Proteins" Collection at https://plus.google.com/collection/Ar9AME with a brief summary of the findings.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 19, Stuart RAY commented:

      The methods for figure 1 in this manuscript are incorrect; while the text says that RDP4 was used to generate figure 1, it's evident from the figure itself (text at top) that SimPlot was used.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 24, Shashi Seshia commented:

      This is an Open Access article under the terms of the Creative-Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License. Readers should be able to download the article without paying any fee.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 17, Ivan Shatsky commented:

      The review contains an extensive bibliography and in general could be useful for many readers, especially those who are taking their first steps in studying the molecular mechanisms of translation initiation in eukaryotes. The main and serious drawback of the article is an incomplete and distorted presentation of the current status of cellular IRES-elements. I already wrote in Pub Med Commons critical notes on the article from the same lab (Xue S et al. 2015. Nature 517 (7532):33-38)devoted to the same problem but, unfortunately, I was not heard. This review,again,does not say anything about a severe controversy in this field, it does not even mention the fact that the vast majority, if not all,of the cellular IRESs proposed to date must be validated since they all have been indentified using the method of bicistronic DNA constructs, a method extremely prone to almost unavoidable artifacts.

       Most of the works on individual cellular IRES quoted in the review belong to the period from the late 1990s to the end of the first decade of 2000s. In recent years, however, several articles have been published that point to uncertainties of our knowledge on cellular IRES, describe various pitfalls in the approaches used to identify them and suggest methods to avoid artifacts and obtain reliable information. The main requirement in these approaches is to use various RNA constructs, rather than bicistronic DNA, to transfect cells and assess the level of their expression. These approaches and stringent criteria to analyze  experimental  data were described in several of our papers (see, for instance, Andreev et al. 2009. Nucleic Acids Res. 37: 6135–6147; Shatsky et al. 2010. Mol.Cells 30: 285–293; Andreev et al. 2012. FEBS Lett. 586: 4139–4143; Terenin et al. 2017. Cell Mol Life Sci. 74: 1431–1455) and employed in our lab to verify IRESs in c-Myc, Apaf-1 and LINE-1 mRNAs. The authors of this NRMCB article probably found these papers not worthy of attention since they are not quoted. The only exception is reference 101 which represents the article with a detailed analysis of the status of cellular IRES by 2013. The analysis was performed by Richard Jackson, a widely known expert in eukaryotic translation (Jackson 2013. Cold Spring Harb.Perspect. Biol. 5: a011569–a011569.) Remarkably,although this reference is present in the text, nothing is said about the actual content and conclusions of Jackson's work. 
      
       The authors note that “over 100 proposed IRES-containing mRNAs have been reported” but “after decades of work, few examples have been well characterized”. However, the authors do not express any surprise why the progress is that slow, why the methods which have been successfully used to validate viral IRESs are not employed or not applicable to characterize cellular IRESs. The authors also note that putative cellular IRESs have “few structural similarities to each other” and that “their mechanisms of action are largely unknown”. Again, the authors do not ask the question:  why for many years now we have not seen positive data on the validation of cellular IRES? Maybe most of these mysterious structures are simply not IRESs, and we must look for alternative mechanisms? Meanwhile, scientific journals, including top ranking ones, go on publishing papers with novel unvalidated cellular IRESs, thereby only thickening the fog in this area 
      
      In short, it seems to me that this section of the review is written in an overly optimistic manner. It is unlikely to be useful for professionals in the translation mechanisms and may be  misleading for new generation of researchers who do not have a sufficient background in the field.
      


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 23, Richard Holliday commented:

      The oral health risks of tobacco smoking are well known and it is critically important we continue to build the evidence base around novel nicotine products so we can accurately inform our patients of the relative risks. It is great to see more research published on this topic.

      After reading this paper, I was left confused with regards to tobacco smoking within the e-cigarette (EC) consumer group. The study population is described as being made up of ‘former cigarette smokers’ and ‘current EC users’.

      The ‘former smokers’ groups were defined as:

      • Smoked >100 cigarettes in their lifetime.
      • Been abstinent (self-reported) for at least 6 months and not more than 2 years.

      The ‘EC consumers’ group were defined as:

      • EC consumers were ‘smoking’ EC for at least 6 months.<br>

      My concern with the study design and interpretation is that there has been inadequate control of confounding factors, particularly tobacco smoking. ‘Dual use’ (i.e. using both combustible tobacco and EC) is very common, currently around 45% in the UK. The study inclusion criteria do not specify that those in the EC consumer group need to be abstinent from tobacco smoking nor do they include any method of biochemically validating this (e.g. expired air carbon monoxide or salivary/urine biomarkers).

      This confounding factor makes the interpretation of the results very challenging. The comparison is between ‘former smokers’ and ‘users of combustible tobacco and EC’. Unfortunately, you can’t differentiate out the effect of the EC with this design. The papers conclusions ‘Our results show that e-cigarettes are linked to three types of inflammatory lesions in the oral cavity’ hence appear invalid.

      I also felt it would have been useful to have a ‘tobacco smoking (without EC)’ comparator group and I was unsure why this was not included or presented. This would have allowed relative risk to be communicated to tobacco smokers.

      I encourage the authors to clarify these points. Many thanks.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 05, Johanna McEntyre commented:

      We do have a mechanism to do this ("External links") - we just need the databases to participate - something we are keen to see and will be encouraging within the context of ELIXIR over the foreseeable future. e.g. Here are all the papers cited in IntAct: http://europepmc.org/search?query=(HAS_INTACT:y)


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2018 Feb 03, Egon Willighagen commented:

      One thing that has been bugging me for some years now (see this write up) is that it is really hard to figure out which databases capture data in articles. An example is WikiPathways which has knowledge extracted from almost 20 thousand articles (unique PubMed IDs), but it is nearly impossible to figure out which databases have data related to some article.

      What would the database community need to do for Europe PMC to use links between articles and database entries?


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2018 Feb 02, Christopher Southan commented:

      OK, but AWK users assume sources are current by default. Any chance of cajoling EPO to re-instate the feed? (would arguably < ELIXIR value)


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2018 Jan 30, Johanna McEntyre commented:

      There are over 4.2 million patents in Europe PMC, which we thought justified a passing mention in the article. No implication other than that was intended.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    5. On 2018 Jan 10, Christopher Southan commented:

      While the advances described for EPMC are impressive, it remains somewhat misleading to imply European Patent Office biotechnology abstracts as a current resource, since the feed ceased in 2012. Would be great if EPO could backfill these which would then uniquely facilitate // searching of patents and literature.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 05, Hiskias Keizer commented:

      Choosing physiological salt as a control for multiple intra-peritoneal CLA-triglyceride injections makes it impossible to decipher which of the effects as noted in this article were caused by CLA and which were caused by intra-peritoneal dosing triglycerides in general.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 29, Michael Hoffman commented:

      I read this paper with interest and welcome its innovative new experimental method.

      Readers may be interested in our 2016 preprint, "Modeling methyl-sensitive transcription factor motifs with an expanded epigenetic alphabet" (Viner et al. 2016, bioRxiv, https://doi.org/10.1101/043794). In our paper, we also extended the four-symbol DNA alphabet to include additional symbols for methyl-C and guanine paired to methyl-C, and used position weight matrices (PWMs) based on this expanded alphabet. Our paper also used sequence logos with the expanded alphabet. The use of an expanded epigenetic alphabet for an energy PWM (ePWM) in the 2017 Zuo et al. paper is an interesting development.

      In 2015, we added custom alphabet support to most tools in the MEME Suite to allow use of this expanded alphabet. We hope that those tools will be useful for many.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 24, Dorothy V M Bishop commented:

      It is great to hear that the authors are conducting a large scale follow-up study: I would urge them to do this as a Registered Report, or at least to pre-register their hypotheses. Yes, small samples are not inherently bad, but, as demonstrated by Ramus in his 2017 paper,it is a sad reality that most findings from small studies in this areas fail to replicate in larger samples - perhaps not surprisingly given heterogeneity of dyslexia. There is a danger that, aware of this history, we might throw out the baby with the bathwater and dismiss genuine, important findings. But it is hard to know which findings are solid because most researchers in this area currently fail to distinguish hypothesis-testing and exploratory studies. A proper, large-scale prospective study with hypotheses identified a priori would be extremely valuable.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Dec 21, Christa Müller-Axt commented:

      We here respond to the questions and concerns raised by Franck Ramus (23th of Nov 2017). We organize our response around four topics: (i) sample size and statistical power, (ii) interpretation of effect sizes, (iii) specific predictions and correlation analyses, and (iv) current status and future directions.

      (i) Sample size and statistical power: Franck Ramus argues that our study lacks statistical power due to the modest sample size (i.e., n=12 dyslexics and n=12 matched controls). First, as recommended by Button et al. (2013), we have explicitly acknowledged and discussed the modest sample size in our manuscript (see pp. 3694 & 3696). Second, given the well-known statistical problems associated with modest sample sizes, we took measures to reproduce our results in additional analyses, as laid out in the paper (i.e., surface-based analyses, see pp. 3694 & e3). While we are aware that these analyses do not constitute an independent replication, they further provide confidence in our main results, as they make it unlikely that the findings are merely due to methodological specificities. Third, the Button et al. (2013) paper elicited a more detailed discussion on sample size issues and neither Button et al. (2013) themselves nor any of the comments and papers in response to Button et al. (2013) suggested that small sample size studies should be dismissed altogether (see e.g., Bacchetti P., 2013; Quinlan P.T., 2013 for a more detailed discussion of these arguments).

      (ii) Interpretation of effect sizes: Franck Ramus questions the plausibility of our results, specifically because the observed effect size for the group difference in left V5/MT-LGN connectivity is larger (d=1.28) than the observed effect size for the associated behavioral difference in rapid automatized naming (RAN) for letters and numbers (composite score: d=1.16). We were surprised by this remark. A larger effect size for left V5/MT-LGN connectivity differences than for behavioral differences on RAN could be explained by a number of reasons, e.g.: 1) altered V5/MT-LGN connectivity might also affect other cognitive processes that are not captured by RAN measures, 2) RAN is supported by additional brain networks, other than V5/MT-LGN connectivity alone, that contribute to task performance, 3) recruitment of compensatory mechanisms that partially substitute altered V5/MT-LGN connectivity to enable RAN performance. In our view, all of these mechanisms (as well as their combinations) seem plausible given the complex and nonlinear nature of the human brain and given the multi-component nature of the RAN. Therefore, we do not see how the apparent difference in reported effect sizes between the behavioral and neural measures would undermine the plausibility of our results.

      (iii) Specific predictions and correlation analyses: Franck Ramus asks whether we had specific predictions about the correlations reported in our paper. We had indeed specific predictions about the RAN and reading comprehension scores. As described in the paper (pp. 3693 & 3695), these predictions were based on a previous finding from our research group that only these two scores correlated with sensory thalamus function in dyslexics in an fMRI study (Diaz et al., 2012). The correlation in that study was only found for RAN and reading comprehension in dyslexics, but not in controls (Diaz et al., 2012). Hence, in the present paper we tested the specific hypothesis that RAN and reading comprehension scores are related to V5/MT-LGN connectivity in dyslexics. Franck Ramus states that there are other core symptoms of dyslexia. He asks whether we tested correlations of V5/MT-LGN connectivity with more behavioral measures than reported, without appropriately correcting for multiple tests. We agree that dyslexia also encompasses other core symptoms (e.g., spelling and reading speed deficits). We did, however, not test for correlations with these or other behavioral measures, as we did not have specific predictions about them. It should go without saying that we do not do selective reporting of test results. Our predictions about the correlations with RAN and reading comprehension related to the dyslexia group, while we did not expect a correlation in the control group. We therefore consider it valid to apply a Bonferroni correction for the two tested correlations within each group separately. We did not compute correlations across the whole sample of dyslexics and controls together, as this would not have addressed our hypothesis (i.e., that RAN and reading comprehension scores are related to V5/MT-LGN connectivity in individuals with developmental dyslexia).

      (iv) Current status and future directions: We appreciate that Franck Ramus highlighted the issue of the replication crisis. Indeed, while we think it is important not to dismiss results merely based on sample size, we agree that novel research findings necessitate replication. For this reason, our research lab is currently conducting a large scale follow-up study for replication as well as testing of further hypotheses generated by the present findings. We hope that the present study will inspire further research on potential deficits at the level of the sensory thalami and cortico-thalamic connections in the dyslexia field – a field that is currently dominated by an almost exclusive cerebral-cortex-centric view.

      Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(5), 365‑376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475

      Bacchetti, P. (2013). Small sample size is not the real problem. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(8), 585-585. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475-c3

      Quinlan, P. T. (2013). Misuse of power: in defence of small-scale science. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(8), 585-585. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475-c1

      Díaz, B., Hintz, F., Kiebel, S. J., & von Kriegstein, K. (2012). Dysfunction of the auditory thalamus in developmental dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(34), 13841-13846. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1119828109


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Nov 24, Dorothy V M Bishop commented:

      I agree with Franck's comment. This seems yet another example of a high impact journal favouring newsworthiness of a result over methodological quality. See my earlier blogpost on this topic:

      https://figshare.com/articles/High-impact_journals_where_newsworthiness_trumps_methodology/5631748


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2017 Dec 12, Jose M. Moran commented:

      Great analysis! completely agree!


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    5. On 2017 Nov 23, Franck Ramus commented:

      This study seems severely underpowered, which is surprising for such a frequent disorder as dyslexia, and given that we are in the midst of a replication crisis (e.g., Button et al. 2013; Ramus et al. 2017).

      With 12 participants per group, this study had 29% chance to observe a moderate group difference (d=0.6). Here, the significant result is due to a huge group difference (d=1.28) in the left V5/MT-LGN connectivity. Even larger than the corresponding behavioural difference in RAN letters (d=1.27) and numbers (d=0.95) (from Table S1). How plausible is it that there should be such a large brain difference between two groups of dyslexic and control individuals, even larger than the cognitive symptoms that this brain difference is presumed to underlie?

      Similarly, with 12 dyslexic individuals, only huge correlations greater than 0.576 could be significant. Luckily this study observed a correlation of 0.588 between left V5/MT-LGN connectivity and RAN (using a one-tailed test and correcting for two tests), but not with reading comprehension. But what about the other behavioural variables, spelling and reading speed? Are they not core symptoms of dyslexia, even more so than RAN? Do they not rely on visual abilities? Were the a priori predictions so specific to RAN and reading comprehension, that correlations with spelling and reading speed were not even tested? If those predictions had been preregistered, this might be credible. Alternatively, were those correlations tested, but not taken into account in the correction for multiple tests? (not even mentioning correlations within the control group, or across the two groups)

      Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(5), 365‑376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475 Ramus, F., Altarelli, I., Jednoróg, K., Zhao, J., & Scotto di Covella, L. (2017). Neuroanatomy of developmental dyslexia : pitfalls and promise. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.08.001


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 21, Franz Schelling commented:

      2-dimensional statistics can't come to terms with 4-dimensional hemodynamic problems such as those illustrated by the Unmistakable MS lesions which reflect retrograde venous impacts - as those shown in tell-tale MRI series

      Please share a non-factional look at Dominik Meier's unquestionably stellar MRI sequences of a patient with multiple sclerosis.

      Isn't https://medium.com/@franzschelling/what-deals-the-brain-such-blows-synchronous-at-least-double-hits-in-an-exemplary-case-of-292877844500 or http://bit.ly/2hu3g9N proving without any shadow of a doubt:

      Such cases of multiple sclerosis are biomechanically primed hemodynamic and obviously venous conditions. Which need to be established as such, to be addressed with the adequate technical equipment and topical expertise.

      F. Schelling, M.D.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Nov 20, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      I think that these two recent papers could be useful to understand better the reasons about the failure of this trial:

      Factors influencing the hemodynamic response to balloon angioplasty in the treatment of outflow anomalies of internal jugular veins http://www.jvsvenous.org/article/S2213-333X(17)30336-0/pdf

      Optimism, enthusiasm, responsibility http://www.jvsvenous.org/article/S2213-333X(17)30335-9/pdf


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 23, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      I think that these two recent papers could be useful to understand better the reasons about the failure of the trial Brave Dreams:

      Factors influencing the hemodynamic response to balloon angioplasty in the treatment of outflow anomalies of internal jugular veins http://www.jvsvenous.org/article/S2213-333X(17)30336-0/pdf

      Optimism, enthusiasm, responsibility http://www.jvsvenous.org/article/S2213-333X(17)30335-9/pdf


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 09, David Keller commented:

      "The most common cause of death was PD"?

      It is notoriously difficult to get physicians to complete death certificates properly, especially when it comes to concisely and accurately identifying the cause of death. Some clinicians list the cause of death as "cardiopulmonary arrest" in nearly all cases, because (they argue) the cessation of pulse and breathing is one of the final events in most deaths, and thus is the most proximate cause of death. This type of error in identifying the cause of death is akin to "missing the forest for the trees", and interferes with research that would benefit from a cause of death that really answered the question: "what disease entity was the main reason this patient died on this admission?"

      On the other hand, we have doctors who are too vague and imprecise in identifying the cause of death, as in this study. Assigning "Parkinson disease" (PD) as the cause of death tells us little in most cases. The fact that a patient had advanced PD when he died does not mean that he died from the direct effects of PD, which is unusual. It would be better to identify a more proximate cause of death, such as stroke associated with recent onset of atrial fibrillation (for example) and list "advanced Parkinson disease" as an "other illness present at death". This would give researchers who use the death certificate a more accurate designation of the proximal prime mover in the patient's death at this time, and also allow for investigations into associations between that cause of death, and the patient's underlying PD.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 20, Doug Altman commented:

      This paper reports a simple descriptive survey of reports of randomised trials published in dermatology journals. It is not a meta-epidemiological study, which is a meta-analytic summary of subgroup analyses across multiple meta-analyses – see for example Sterne et al (Stat Med 2002) [PMID: 12111917].


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 18, Christopher Southan commented:

      As a more convenient alternative to supplementary data or figshare, NAR were enlightened in accepting pointers to our own blog posts (http://www.guidetopharmacology.org/news.jsp). We will thus now be able to update these

      Note also this paper follows on from our 2016 effort https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26464438 so please switch to this 2018 one for future citations


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 21, Samira Vesali commented:

      Natural conception and reproductive experiences in cancer survivors who stored reproductive material before their treatment In the October 2017 issue of human reproduction (vol: 17, Page:1-8), Hammarberg K, 2017, published an opinion piece arguing of 301 respondents who had tried to achieve pregnancy since completing cancer treatment almost all had succeeded, in most cases through natural conception,Hammarberg K, 2017. There are some worthwhile points were not considered in this study, even as limitations or reasons for caution, which are bias influencing their findings. First, relatively response rate. It is not possible to know whether people with better or worse survival were more or less likely to participate. Our thoughts on this issue is that cancer patients undergoing advanced stages likely did not tend to participate in the survey. As well, those with malignancy normally get more extensive chemotherapy, which can damage their reproductive system. Evidence has been shown that different chemotherapy regimens can affect the reproductive system differently, Long JP, 2016. However, cancer patients who were on malignant stages have likely lower life expectancy and less hope childbearing after their treatment. It is possible they are less inclined to look for and benefit from fertility preservation options to store their cryopreserved material. Second, we believe that it is important to view the findings within the context of the cancer type, stage and chemotherapy regimens of the participants, because all the mentioned factors can lead to use or not use the frozen reproductive material and are effective in the participants’ ability to get pregnant naturally (possibly mild chemotherapy which can preserve some of the ovarian reserve). Third, the cancer patients studied were recruited from 1995 to 2014, but as we know Human Fertility and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has given permission to the usage of frozen eggs in United Kingdom (UK) from 2000, Wise J, 2000, and American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) removed the label of “experimental” from oocyte freezing in 2013,Practice Committees of American Society for Reproductive Medicine., 2013 . So, giving single vision to all frozen materials of participants during this time period maybe is not correct. Earlier, the patients only could enjoy form the cryopreserved embryo and sperm, then ovarian tissue and more recently oocytes. Looking at the table II, the pregnancy achievement is presented as “as a result of ART with stored material” but is not presented separately. It is not clear that all usage of stored material are adequately cryopreserved gametes or embryos or not. Fourth, the essential problem we see is that age can be another confounding factor in this survey. Many of the people who have never tried to get pregnant may be in advanced age, but we do not know the age of those who did not respond or never tried to get pregnant. Reza Omani Samani1, Samira Vesali1* 1 Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health, Reproductive Epidemiology Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran Correspondence address: Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: samiravesali@yahoo.com.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 19, Gwinyai Masukume commented:

      The authors define this pregnant patient’s Haemoglobin (Hb) of 8.9 g/dL as mild anemia. However according to the World Health Organization (WHO) this is moderate anemia (Hb < 10 but >= 7 g/dL) (WHO, 2011).

      It is suggested that theirs is the first case report describing an HIV infected pregnant patient with uncorrected Tetralogy of Fallot. In 2011 Solanki and co-authors reported such a case Solanki SL, 2011.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 12, Matthew Bjerknes commented:

      Haber AL, 2017 claim as novel their observation that a type of tuft cell expresses "the pan-immune marker CD45, which was not previously associated with non-haematopoietic cells" (see abstract). It is important to correct the oversight that the fact that tuft cells express PTPRC, encoding the pan-immune marker CD45, was first reported by Bezençon C, 2008.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 20, Tanai Cardona commented:

      I had suggested a similar experiment in a blog post back in the day (June 19, 2013): http://tanaiscience.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/ethanol-production-using-heterocyst.html

      Glad to see it worked and that my prediction for better ethanol production in the heterocysts wasn't too crazy after all. In any case, using cyanobacteria to produce biofuels might need rates many times higher for it to become of any use at all. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4364286/

      Well done! All the best, Tanai


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 18, Anthony Michael commented:

      This article addresses the degradation of the polyamine spermine (Spm) by a strain of Bacillus subtilis used in the fermentation of soybeans to produce the Japanese fermented foodstuff “natto”. The authors have paraphrased half a sentence from a review of mine that dramatically misrepresents the whole sentence and meaning. In their article, the authors state, “However, it is widely accepted that bacteria do not produce Spm (Michael, 2016) and direct degradation of Spm by B. subtilis (natto) is unproven.” In fact, my review stated, “It had been accepted dogma that bacteria do not produce spermine (77); however, that supposition was incorrect, and in fact Spm has been detected in diverse bacteria (25).” (Michael, A.J. (2016) Polyamines in Eukaryotes, Bacteria and Archaea. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 14896-903 PMID: 27268252). In an age of fake news, this could be construed as fake citation.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 31, John Sotos commented:

      "The Popeye sign," described in the Journal as a marked bulge in the upper arm after rupture of the biceps tendon (1), should more correctly have been called "a Popeye sign," given that the term "Popeye arm" has been applied to patients with fascio-scapulo-humeral muscular dystrophy who have wasting of the biceps combined with preserved deltoid and forearm musculature (2).

      The confusion is understandable to anyone familiar with Popeye-the-Sailorman's complex and dynamic upper limb anatomy. In his baseline state, Popeye exhibited the forearm muscular hypertrophy common among sailors of his era (the 1930s), for whom scraping paint was a frequent duty (3). To science's detriment, the instantaneous biceps hypertrophy that Popeye experienced after oral spinach ingestion remains physiologically unexplained.

      Thus, for maximal clarity, an eponymical purist would use the terms "pre-spinach Popeye sign" and "post-spinach Popeye sign," respectively, in cases of fascio-scapulo-humeral muscular dystrophy and biceps tendon rupture.

      (1) Yoshida N, Tsuchida Y. "Popeye" sign. Images in clinical medicine. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377: 1976.

      (2) Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital, Case 40-1991. N Engl J Med. 1991; 325: 1026-1035.

      (3) Hornfischer JD. The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors. New York: Bantam Dell, 2005. Page 90.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 16, Erick H Turner commented:

      The authors make mention of two approaches for dealing with publication bias. However, both of these can be classified as statistical approaches for use when the only data to which one has access is the published literature. Another approach: simply procure the missing data. Instead of relying on manuscript cohorts, one can look further “upstream” to inception cohorts of clinical trials. Examples of sources include regulatory data (e.g. Drugs@FDA), grants databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 17, Giorgio Cattoretti commented:

      In 2014 [PMID: 24794148] we demonstrated that a pH2 Glycine buffer and a boiling 6M Urea buffer fail to remove primary antibodies in an exquisitely affinity-dependent fashion. Secondary antibodies increase the primary antibody affinity, further preventing the antibody complex removal with those buffers. Antibodies were not "degraded " to the point of not being recognizable by a second step, as shown in our paper. Later this year [PMID: 28692376 ] we published two separate and efficient antibody removal technique which preserve tissue antigenicity entirely over ten cycles and more. The method allows whole slide immunostaining with routine reagents and open source analysis tools as per this manuscript, but with far more markers per slide (50 or more). This manuscript describes a partially efficient two-step method for “detachment” but little rationale for the choice of buffers and none of the multiple previous references dealing with antibody removal (see our 2014 manuscript for a list). The fact that the Authors reproduce our previous observations is comforting; unfortunately misses the scientific rationale we provided and the solution of the problem we published.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 17, Xinlai Cheng commented:

      Here is the gRNA sequence information for Stat3 Double Nickase Plasmid (h) : sc-400027-NIC:

      sc-400027-NIC Stat3 Double Nickase Plasmid (h): gcctagatcggctagaaaac sc-400027-NIC Stat3 Double Nickase Plasmid (h): gttgggcgggcctccaatgc

      we can also provide you our established cell line. Let me know if you want


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Nov 15, Nirajkumar Makadiya commented:

      Hi,

      What sgRNA sequences were used in the KO cell line generation?

      Thank you!


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 19, Kenneth Witwer commented:

      This study suggests that approximately 20 microRNAs (miRNAs) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) may distinguish between different responses to exercise or between sedentary controls and individuals living with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS, also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis, or ME) and Gulf War Illness (GWI). Funded by recent NIH efforts to support research into several related, poorly-understood and debilitating conditions, this report represents a large and commendable undertaking in terms of patient recruitment (182 individuals) and sample collection. Unfortunately, experimental and analytical issues limit interpretation of the results. I would like to highlight several of these here in the hopes of stimulating rigorous follow-up as appropriate.

      1) The choice of a threshold of 35 for a clearly noisy qPCR array. A Cq threshold (to distinguish noise from real signal) was assigned to Cq=35, higher than might have been supported by the negative controls. 82 "positive" negative control features were found in this dataset, with an average Cq of 35.6. 34 of these data points were below Cq 35, averaging 33.1, and several amplified before 25.9. This is a high false positive signal, raising concerns about specificity of the array and suggesting that a lower threshold might have been appropriate.

      2) The noise threshold was effectively ignored by adjusting all values above 35 (PCR noise) to 35. This replaced noise with "data" points and introduced a block of artificially invariable values. In a re-analysis after discarding Cq>35, at least half of the reported differences fall away or are smaller. Specifically, results for the following miRNAs appear to be affected by the Cq=35 adjustment: miR-99b-5p, miR-423-5p, miR-204-5p, miR-30d-5p; let-7i-5p, miR-200a-5p, and miR-93-3p (these three miRNAs also do not reach the 2/3 detection threshold in the exercise groups); miR-19b-3p, miR-505-3p, miR-532-5p, and miR-186-3p (for the latter, only one and two Cq<35 data points were gathered for the SC and CFS groups, respectively); and miR-22-3p and miR-9-3p (detected in only one group). miR-22-3p may remain significant, but the real difference between groups is about half the reported value.

      3) A miRNA was considered "expressed" in any one of the seven groups only if it was found in 2/3 of all samples. Unfortunately, this threshold was then ignored in analysis, when even miRNAs that were "expressed" in only one group were compared between groups. In some cases, miRNAs with only one or two amplifications in a group were reported (like miR-186-3p).

      4) No validation or measures of technical variability. First, there is no assessment of technical variability. The qPCR array gives one reading per miRNA per sample, with the exception of a negative control, read twice. Reading the same sample on three or four arrays would show how precise the readings are. Some of the miRNAs have up to 15-cycle detection ranges (even with Cq=35 as the cutoff) within groups. This represents a >32,000-fold range if it is an accurate measure of abundance. As a result, the purported differences between groups are often overshadowed by large standard deviations. It is unclear how much of this variability is technical, thus it is difficult to assign any differences to biology. Second, no findings are validated by individual assays. Instead of, or in addition to, technical array repeats, individual qPCR assays are routinely used in RNA biomarker studies to confirm profiling findings. These experiments are relatively cheap and permit multiple technical replicates for each sample. Third, no spike-ins are reported (RNA extraction efficiency) nor is there quality control of RNA prior to array measurements. While I can understand that the authors's enthusiasm might have spurred them to proceed without some standard procedures, it is perplexing that reviewers (and editors) would not ask for these crucial experiments.

      Despite these critiques, there are several findings that appear to be supported by a reanalysis (excluding Cq>35). These include the finding of 40-fold decreased abundance of miR-328 in CSF of exercised versus non-exercised individuals (although this is not restricted to any particular disease group), and, to a lesser extent (8-fold), miR-608. While validation is needed, and ideally a before-and-after study (in animals if this is too demanding in humans), at least these miRNAs may justify follow-up. Several other miRNAs are also significantly different between the two groups, but with large variability, diminishing their likely utility as biomarkers. However, with most of the purported CFS or GWI differences confounded by the thresholding strategies, and with no validation, additional evidence will be needed before other conclusions can be drawn. Notably, there was no discernible pattern of neuronal, oligodendrocyte (providing myelin sheath), or inflammation-associated miRNAs, which one might expect with damage or inflammation associated with CFS/ME or the acetylcholinesterase-linked mechanisms for GWI that is mentioned, so I am doubtful that this avenue of investigation will be fruitful.

      Patients of CFS/ME not only have to live with this condition, they have been through a lot in recent years with irreproducible science. I would thus encourage the authors both to moderate speculation about CFS or GWI-associated miRNAs for now and to proceed with and report the results of blinded qPCR quantification. I would recommend using the standard stem-loop RT/TaqMan assays for this. Indeed, I would be glad to examine samples along with you in a blinded fashion if it would be helpful.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 22, Sander Houten commented:

      This paper focuses on the role of KLF14 in the regulation of hepatic gluconeogenesis in mice. The authors show that Klf14 mRNA and KLF14 protein expression in mouse liver is induced after overnight fasting. The authors furthermore show that Klf14 mRNA and KLF14 protein expression increased in liver of C57BL/6 mice on high fat diet, db/db mice and ob/ob mice when compared to control animals. The authors continue to demonstrate that the promoter of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma coactivator 1alpha (Pgc-1alpha), a transcriptional regulator of gluconeogenesis, contains one KLF14-binding site. In subsequent experiments the authors use adenovirus-mediated KLF14 overexpression and knockdown in isolated mouse hepatocytes and in vivo in mice, which further indicated that KLF14 modulates hepatic gluconeogenesis (Wang L, 2017).

      I would like to point out that there is little evidence to support the hypothesis that KLF14 plays an important role in adult mouse liver biology. We found no evidence for expression of KLF14 in adult mouse liver as we were unable to amplify Klf14 cDNA, did not find Klf14 mapped reads in liver RNA sequencing data and found no specific signal upon immunoblotting (Argmann CA, 2017). Our data on the absence of Klf14 expression in liver are consistent with previously published work by others (Parker-Katiraee L, 2007) and publicly available data sources. We also investigated the physiological functions of KLF14 by studying a whole body KO mouse model and focused on the metabolic role of this transcription factor in mice on chow and high fat diet. Our results indicate that KLF14 does not play a role in the development of diet-induced insulin resistance in male C57BL/6 mice (Argmann CA, 2017).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 15, Franz Schelling commented:

      Congratulations on this pioneering study! I would highly appreciate being granted a reprint (F. Schelling, Fingstr. 32, A-6974 Gaissau, Austria) or electronic copy of the entire paper (dr.franz.schelling@aon.at)


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 12, Jose M. Moran commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Dec 12, Jose M. Moran commented:

      Dear Alvaro, I think that your comments deserve a Letter to the Editor.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Nov 09, Alvaro Alonso commented:

      This paper reports that warfarin users had lower overall incidence rates of cancer than non-users in a large population-based cohort. The association was present for most cancers.

      One major limitations in this analysis, that puts into question the validity of the results, is the lack of adjustment for potential confounders. The reported models seem to only adjust for age and sex. The authors did not consider any other factor that may influence the decision to prescribe or not warfarin. It has been established that frail and sicker individuals are less likely to receive oral anticoagulation with warfarin, even if indicated, and to discontinue treatment (see for example PMID 19151165, 26277091 and 27471198).

      In summary, before concluding that a particular medication has a blanket anticancer effect, I would expect a more careful consideration of confounding.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 22, NephJC - Nephrology Journal Club commented:

      The trial of Tolvaptan in Later-Stage Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease was discussed on November 14th and 15th 2017 on #NephJC, the open online nephrology journal club. Introductory comments written by Ian Logan are available at the NephJC website here and a patient perspective is available here.

      160 people participated in the discussion with an impressive 1215 tweets.

      The highlights of the tweetchat were:

      • In general, tolvaptan is still not routinely used, limited by lack of approval, concerns regarding cost-effectiveness, and patient tolerance in presymptomatic CKD.

      • This was a well-designed study but one year may be too short an interval to evaluate at given that ADPKD is a lifelong disease.

      • The benefit is mainly driven by stage 3a group. In stage 3b & 4 the change in GFR decline was between 0.78-0.81 ml/min

      • The results overall are promising for Tolvaptan particularly if it can delay ESRD by a few years to allow time for pre-emptive transplant but concerns still remain regarding patient selection, tolerance, and the haemodynamic drop in GFR mediated by the drug.

      Transcripts of the tweetchats, and curated versions as storify are available from the NephJC website.

      Interested individuals can track and join in the conversation by following @NephJC or #NephJC on twitter, liking @NephJC on facebook, signing up for the mailing list, or just visit the webpage at NephJC.com.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 10, Arthur Yin Fan commented:

      Great news! This month our article has been selected as one of ten articles for the November 2017 Atlas Awards Nominations: "Acupuncture’s Role in Solving the Opioid Epidemic: Evidence, Cost-Effectiveness, and Care Availability for Acupuncture as a Primary, Non-Pharmacologic Method for Pain Relief and Management–White Paper 2017″ (Arthur Yin Fan is the first author, and Dr.David Miller is the correspondence author, our colleague Sarah Faggert also a co-author---there are 14 authors across the United States).

      As is stated on the Elsevier Atlas Awards homepage: “Each month the Atlas Advisory Board are sent a selection of 10 articles to choose their winning Atlas article. The articles are shortlisted by Elsevier from across journal portfolios based on their potential social impact. We are delighted to present the entire monthly shortlist and congratulate the authors of the nominated articles.” While the voting is still in progress, we are still very excited to even be nominated. This marks the first time that an acupuncture article has been nominated for the Elsevier Atlas Award.You may click on the following link to take you the Elsevier Atlas Awards Nominations page: https://www.elsevier.com/connect/atlas/nominations.

      We will let you know should our article win!

      Nominations Each month the Atlas Advisory Board are sent a selection of 10 articles to choose their winning Atlas article. ELSEVIER.COM


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 04, James M Heilman commented:

      One additional comment regarding the selection of questions used for the quizes. While SG and I selected them, we did so in a random manner.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 17, Jos Verbeek commented:

      The phrase in the background of the abstract of this article that there is 'no consolidated evidence for workplace interventions to reduce or prevent neck pain' is at odds with the four Cochrane reviews that appear in the box of 'similar articles' to the right of the abstract. Given that only English language articles were included, it is unclear what this systematic review adds to the body of evidence already available.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 21, Ralph Brinks commented:

      The authors state that Hoyer and Brinks set up "a hypothetical (micro-simulated) population" with "a linear increase of diabetes incidence to age 70 years". It is not true that we performed a micro-simulation. Instead, we used analytical relations between incidence and prevalence as cited, e.g. Brinks R, 2014. The linear increase of the age-specific incidence is an approximation to the values reported in the original paper. We agree that this an approximation only.

      The key point we made is that ignoring mortality yields to biased estimates of the incidence. This point has not been - and cannot be - undermined by the authors. Thus, we strongly discourage the use of the Styblo method whenever mortality matters.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 03, Helmi BEN SAAD commented:

      Please note that the 1st author correct name is "Ben Saad H" not "Saad HB".


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 29, Wichor Bramer commented:

      Dear Hilda,

      Thank you for your comments and your additional clarification via e-mail upon my request.

      From your comments and clarification I understand that the nature and differences of the ESM and DAH searches might not be clear to you, and therefore also not to the other readers of the article. Let me start by explaining this in more detail.

      The ESM searches were librarian-mediated searches created by me upon requests of researchers at our institute, Erasmus MC in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The DAH searchers were librarian-mediated searches created by other information specialist upon requests of researchers at other academic hospitals in the Netherlands. The researchers published the outcomes of the searches as systematic reviews between January 2014 and June 2016. The topics of the reviews differ, as can be seen in table 1 in the article. Though we did not check that for all ESM and DAH reviews, the reviews were probably executed and reported according to the PRISMA standards. The review authors were responsible for the inclusion process, and the evaluation of the relevance of the retrieved articles.

      This leads to an answer to your two questions:

      1) The ESM and DAH reviews differ on topics. Therefore there is no direct comparison of two searches (at different times), which would require the exclusion of references retrieved based on a later search date. The ESM and DAH reviews are published in the same period, therefore we can conclude that the searches had been performed in the same period as well (though we did not analyze this).

      2) As the both the ESM and the DAH searches are done at the requests of researchers, it was the responsibility of the review authors, all topic experts, to assess the relevance of the retrieved references. The reviews authors were not involved in the research, neither were they informed of the inclusion of their review in this research. Inclusion was only done after the review was published, therefore to the best of our knowledge, there was no bias in the inclusion process of the ESM and DAH reviews.

      We do acknowledge that the weakness of this study is that a direct comparison is impossible, since there are different searches on different topics. We therefore have started with a follow up research in which we create three simultaneous searches on a topic for a systematic reviews by three independent information specialists. All results will then be combined for the researchers to review the retrieved references for relevance.

      We will take your comments into account by the execution and writing of that research, as we have done with your earlier comments on a previous research article (a comparison of Medline, Embase and Google Scholar) which have influenced the data analysis and reporting of this research.

      Once again thank you for your comments, and looking forward to discussing our research in the future with you.

      Kind regards, Wichor


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 28, Hilda Bastian commented:

      It would be useful if the authors could provide detail on two key issues not described in the paper. The first is the method for excluding identified references that were published subsequent to the date of the original searches.

      The second is how eligibility for study inclusion was assessed for the ESM group, and by whom. This is a key outcome measure, that is also highly susceptible to bias. A method for reducing this bias, for example, would be assessment by more than one assessor independent of those conducting the searches, blinded to the search strategy by which the study had been identified.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 30, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      CRISPR SPACERS PROVIDE "JUNK" VLA RNAs

      A "peculiarity of human thinking" invokes sad head-shaking in some quarters. It is argued, not only that "the vast majority of low abundant transcripts are simply junk," but also that such junk is "simple" (1). Those led to think that junk DNA serves the organism (i.e. can under some conditions be functional and hence selectively advantageous) are labelled "determinists." They can scarcely be distinguished from "ID believers"! There is no mention of the two-decade-old view that very low abundance transcripts (VLA RNAs) represent an intracellular antibody-like repertoire, for which much evidence has since accumulated (2-4).

      For microorganisms, the CRISPR system provided a clear example of the functionality of the transcription of their spacer "junk DNA." Ledford notes that the system "adapts to, and remembers, specific genetic invaders in a similar way to how human antibodies provide long-term immunity after an infection" (5). Just as we have germline cascades of V genes that confer immunological specificity on B and T lymphocytes, so microorganisms have their germline spacers that confer a similar specificity on their RNA populations. However, the functionality of an individual spacer "sense" transcript is only tested when a virus with a specific "antisense" sequence enters the cell. Transcription is conditional. The selective advantage can only emerge when the corresponding pathogen attacks.

      Thus, the analytical problem is not so "simple" as showing by experimental DNA deletion that the transcript of a specific eukaryotic gene is functional, or as dismissively postulating a requirement for "unacceptably high birth rates." Deletion of a single human V-region gene could show no selective effect if no corresponding pathogens invaded the body. Even if there were such an invasion, other V-regions would likely be able to compensate for the deletion. Similarly, deleting a segment of "junk" DNA is unlikely to impact survival if some of the wide spectrum of alternative "junk" transcripts can compensate for this defect in the RNA antibody-like repertoire.

      1.Sverdlov E (2017) Transcribed junk remains junk if it does not acquire a selected function in evolution. BioEssays doi: 10.1002/bies.201700164. Sverdlov E, 2017

      2.Cristillo AD, Mortimer JR, Barrette IH, Lillicrap TP, Forsdyke DR (2001) Double-stranded RNA as a not-self alarm signal: to evade, most viruses purine-load their RNAs, but some (HTLV-1, Epstein-Barr) pyrimidine-load. J Theor Biol 208:475-491. Cristillo AD, 2001

      3.Forsdyke DR, Madill CA, Smith SD (2002) Immunity as a function of the unicellular state: implications of emerging genomic data. Trends Immunol 23:575-579. Forsdyke DR, 2002

      4.Forsdyke DR (2016) Evolutionary Bioinformatics. 3rd edition. Springer, New York, pp. 279-303.

      5.Ledford H (2017) Five big mysteries about CRISPR’s origins. Nature 541:280-282. Ledford H, 2017


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 13, Randi Pechacek commented:

      Kaisa Koskinen, first author of this paper, wrote a blog post on microBEnet explaining some background to the research.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 06, Alexander Kraev commented:

      This is an interesting case of active nescience, because both authors were aware, even before their work started, of the fact that the PLN transgenic strain they used had a peculiar genomic structure that resulted in the presence of two resident wildtype PLN gene copies and 13 transgenic mutant (R9C) PLN gene copies under the control of alpha-MHC promoter. This situation can never, even theoretically, occur in a human patient (https://doi.org/10.1101/075671). Yet, they chose to compare it to another transgenic strain, expressing another gene with the same promoter cassette, wherein the transgene structure and genomic location are unknown. The authors state that "Although these mice are DCM models, their etiology are different from each other", which is based on the assumption that different genes are used in the two transgenes. The original descriptions of the transgenes both lack data on transgene localization and also lack the minimally necessary controls, such as an analysis of two or more transgenic lines produced with the same DNA construct. The readers should interpret the data in this paper with extreme caution, since some or all of the "universality in failing hearts" found between the two strains may stem from the use of the common expression cassette, and/or its genomic location. However, if these data are ever validated by the use of a more advanced transgenic method, this paper would serve as a good reference of the extent of conceptual misdirection the lack of transgene genomic characterization can induce.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 18, Amos Bairoch commented:

      It is a very bad idea to call this cell line "KB". KB is a very well known HeLa contaminated cell line established in 1955 and distributed by many cell collections. See: https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_0372


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 29, David Keller commented:

      No placebo control, blinding or randomization, nor confidence intervals for the purported benefits

      Patients with Parkinson disease (PD) are uniquely susceptible to the placebo effect due to the role of dopamine in expectation effects. Studies which do not include placebo control, double-blinding and randomization of subjects to therapy, cannot claim to provide more than anecdotal data.

      Medical cannabis has been legalized in many states, but remains on Schedule 1 as an illegal drug at the national level. Because the commercial cultivation of cannabis is also illegal, most is supplied by underworld criminal sources. High levels of herbicides such as paraquat have been measured in marijuana, exposure to which is a risk factor for PD. I would insist on cannabis grown under safe legal conditions before risking exposure of PD patients to unknown levels of herbicides.

      It is difficult to imagine how an intoxicant like cannabis, which impairs so many neurological functions, could reduce falls in PD patients. PD patients are also susceptible to dementia, and the long-term dementia risk of cannabis intoxication is not known.

      As a clinician, I cannot at this time place any credence in these reported benefits of cannabis for the treatment of PD.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 24, David Keller commented:

      Treating pain versus preventing addiction - finding a balance

      In their Viewpoint editorial, titled "Underlying Factors in Drug Overdose Deaths", Dowell and colleagues use the term "prescription opioids" to refer to all opioids that can be obtained by prescription, without distinguishing how they were, in fact, obtained. This nomenclature conflates two very distinct and different categories of opioid users: pain patients taking opioids prescribed by their physician, and persons who abuse opioids without medical indication or supervision. The latter should be designated "abusers of prescription opioids" to avoid creating a false impression of elevated risk from the proper use of prescribed opioids.

      The Figure showing alarming increases in "prescription opioid overdose deaths" does not reveal what fraction of these deaths occur in persons who obtain prescription opioid medication by illegal means, such as buying or stealing pills from acquaintances or drug dealers, again inflating the risk of death from the proper use of prescribed opioids.

      Overdose deaths should not be reported as "related to prescription opioids" when coexisting levels of alcohol, benzodiazepines, heroin or other illegal narcotics are found in the blood. Deaths from polysubstance abuse creates a falsely high impression of the risk of prescribed opioids when taken as directed.

      Doctors know full well that "unnecessary exposure to prescription opioids" is to be avoided, but would the crisis of "prescription opioid overdose deaths" end, even if all "prescription opioids" were outlawed completely? Hint: heroin overdoses did not end when heroin was made illegal. Overdoses of "prescription opioids" by drug abusers will not end, regardless of how diligently doctors reduce the therapeutic use of opioids.

      Pain patients are questioned as if they were criminals for needing strong pain medicine, by doctors wary of the legal and regulatory risk of "excessive prescribing" of opioids. Under-treatment of pain becomes inevitable, because clinicians lack time for the extensive documentation, discussions, warnings, contracts, testing, database queries and other precautions which are advised with each opioid prescription.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 23, Franck Ramus commented:

      There is at least one more problem with this study that Mark Seidenberg did not point out in his critique (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=35144). It is that the two groups were tested sequentially: first the 30 controls, then the 30 dyslexics. This is generally avoided in experimental psychology (and biology as well), because this is so prone to experimenter bias (unwittingly influencing differentially the members of each group), as well as to apparatus bias (e.g., apparatus parameters changing at some point, making these parameters confounded with group membership).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 21, Samira Vesali commented:

      Natural conception and reproductive experiences in cancer survivors who stored reproductive material before their treatment

      In the October 2017 issue of human reproduction (vol: 17, Page:1-8), Hammarberg K, 2017, published an opinion piece arguing of 301 respondents who had tried to achieve pregnancy since completing cancer treatment almost all had succeeded, in most cases through natural conception,Hammarberg K, 2017. There are some worthwhile points were not considered in this study, even as limitations or reasons for caution, which are bias influencing their findings. First, relatively response rate. It is not possible to know whether people with better or worse survival were more or less likely to participate. Our thoughts on this issue is that cancer patients undergoing advanced stages likely did not tend to participate in the survey. As well, those with malignancy normally get more extensive chemotherapy, which can damage their reproductive system. Evidence has been shown that different chemotherapy regimens can affect the reproductive system differently, Long JP, 2016. However, cancer patients who were on malignant stages have likely lower life expectancy and less hope childbearing after their treatment. It is possible they are less inclined to look for and benefit from fertility preservation options to store their cryopreserved material. Second, we believe that it is important to view the findings within the context of the cancer type, stage and chemotherapy regimens of the participants, because all the mentioned factors can lead to use or not use the frozen reproductive material and are effective in the participants’ ability to get pregnant naturally (possibly mild chemotherapy which can preserve some of the ovarian reserve). Third, the cancer patients studied were recruited from 1995 to 2014, but as we know Human Fertility and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has given permission to the usage of frozen eggs in United Kingdom (UK) from 2000, Wise J, 2000, and American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) removed the label of “experimental” from oocyte freezing in 2013,Practice Committees of American Society for Reproductive Medicine., 2013 . So, giving single vision to all frozen materials of participants during this time period maybe is not correct. Earlier, the patients only could enjoy form the cryopreserved embryo and sperm, then ovarian tissue and more recently oocytes. Looking at the table II, the pregnancy achievement is presented as “as a result of ART with stored material” but is not presented separately. It is not clear that all usage of stored material are adequately cryopreserved gametes or embryos or not.<br> Fourth, the essential problem we see is that age can be another confounding factor in this survey. Many of the people who have never tried to get pregnant may be in advanced age, but we do not know the age of those who did not respond or never tried to get pregnant. Reza Omani Samani1, Samira Vesali1* 1 Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health, Reproductive Epidemiology Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran Correspondence address: Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: samiravesali@yahoo.com.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 22, Christian J. Wiedermann commented:

      Comment on “The dose of hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4 for fluid therapy and the incidence of acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: A retrospective matched study”

      In a retrospective cohort study (Momeni M, 2017), it was analyzed whether the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in cardiac surgery differed depending on weight-adjusted cumulative doses of 6% hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130/0.4 for pump priming and/or perioperative fluid therapy. In the absence of any safety study, authors concluded that in cardiac surgery the cumulative dose of modern HES should be kept less than 30 mL/kg.

      From a total of 1564 evaluable patients fulfilling the study`s inclusion criteria, 63 subjects were excluded from analyses because cardiac surgery had been performed without administration of HES. Without a control group (patients not receiving HES excluded), the study was performed on 983 subjects who received a low dose of HES and 518 who were in a high dose HES group. Among these HES-receiving patients, a dose-dependent increase of AKI was observed, thus, confirming in cardiac surgery patients previous observations of dose-dependent nephrotoxicity of HES (Mutter TC, 2013).

      A safe volume of any HES solution has yet to be determined (Mutter TC, 2013, Wiedermann CJ, 2009). Because AKI in response to 6% HES 130/0.4 may be seen at low doses, the authors' conclusions (Momeni M, 2017) that modern HES should be kept at cumulative doses less than 30 mL/kg ignores the fact that in patients not receiving any HES at all, AKI frequency may be even lower than in their low dose group. Thus, the only conclusion should have been that in cardiac surgery, HES-induced nephrotoxicity is dose dependent. The recommendation of using HES doses less than 30 mL/kg carries the risk of increasing AKI. Unless a safe volume is determined, 6% HES 130/0.4 should be avoided in cardiac surgery.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 31, Louis-Etienne Lorenzo commented:

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17626281 Differential organization of GABA(A) and glycine receptors in the somatic and dendritic compartments of rat abducens motoneurons.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 13, Franz Schelling commented:

      "Without a good understanding of the vascular pathophysiologic factors that influence the patency of ballooned IJVs, it is difficult to perform any meaningful work relating any neurologic condition that may or may not be associated with constricted venous outflow." ... ought not this point given in the papers 'Discussion' be given in its 'Conclusion' part.

      Three questions asides: (1) Wasn't it observed that the muscular IJV entrapments depend widely on (a) head, (b) shoulder position and (c) jaw bracing? with (a) applying first to the sternal head of the sternocleidomastoid, (a)+(b) to the omohyoid, and (c) to the digastric muscle? (2) What about the often observed efficacy of deep inspiration/chest bracing in terms of flow reversals in the left IJV? (3) MRI findings of a severe hypoplasia of the entire J1 length seem preferentially due to its broad clamping between sternal part of the sternocleidomastoid and anterior scalene muscle - a problem which any good ENT surgeon can solve.

      Just some cues which may prove useful for making further advances.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 17, Joel Nitzkin commented:

      I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from this study with regard to softening or hardening without considering the totality of continuing nicotine intake by the various categories of distressed individuals. A new element, not considered by these authors is the development of electronic nicotine delivery systems that can satisfy the urge to smoke for these and other smokers. Pretending that these products do not exist or that these distressed smokers are not utilizing them, or that self-administered nicotine does not provide significant cognitive benefit to these smokers is to blind ourselves to the possibility that these products may offer a new pathway to more substantial reduction in cigarette consumption than has been considered to date.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 17, Peter Hajek commented:

      The data presented here do not support the 'softening' claim. Objective measures of nicotine intake are needed to see if the reduction in number of cigarettes, which is likely to be a response to increased cost of smoking, generated any reduction in nicotine intake. People may or may not smoke the remaining cigarettes with more puffs and deeper inhalations. Regarding the second finding, a history of more failed quit attempts implies hardening rather than softening.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 08, Franz Schelling commented:

      Apologies, my dear compatriots: So much has been said and shown on the role which particular vein length play in the emergence of the cerebral lesions of MS - why not risk a glimpse at http://bit.ly/2hu3g9N - wouldn't be so kind as to tell me what your focusing on direct or metabolically mediated arterial risk factors has been motivated be?


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 18, Kenneth J Smith commented:

      The authors agree, of course, that MS lesions predominantly occur around veins, and we make this point in our paper. A purpose of our paper is to provide a deeper understanding of how perivenous lesions can arise due to tissue hypoxia. We make the point that hypoxia in arterial watershed territories will exacerbate the venous influence on lesion genesis.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 22, Franz Schelling commented:

      The fact that the MS lesion patterns observed in the brain do not reflect arterial border zones, the "last meadows" of arterial perfusion, but an unexplained kind of venous impacts has become more and more evident since 1911. In this year, Alexander Bruce for the first time noted the lesion arrangements along tributaries of the internal cerebral veins. And up to the latest MRI studies, the cerebral MS lesions' vascular relationships have consistently spoken not of central lesion arteries but of central lesion veins.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Nov 18, Kenneth J Smith commented:

      The authors agree that it is well established that the grey matter has a higher metabolic rate than the white matter, and this is in accord with the higher vascular density in the grey matter. This fact does not address whether oligodendrocytes are particularly susceptible to tissue hypoxia. There is widespread experience that oligodendrocytes are very vulnerable, although the underlying reasons remain unclear. The location of oligodendrocytes in the white matter accentuates their vulnerability, not only due to the relative paucity of the vasculature, but also because of the propensity of the white matter vasculature to contain relatively deoxygenated blood.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2017 Oct 22, Franz Schelling commented:

      To come closer to the point: Why needs the cerebral grey matter fife to then as much arterial perfusion, oxygen and nutrients than the cerebral white matter? It is the presence of nerve cells as these are present in the grey matter alone. All the other tissue constituents occur in both white and grey matter.

      The far higher density of blood vessels in the grey as against the white brain tissues testifies equally to the higher metabolic demands of the nerve cell containing - and not of the oligodendrocyte rich tissue.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    5. On 2017 Nov 18, Kenneth J Smith commented:

      The authors do not believe they have deepened any misconceptions. First, we make no claims that Dawson’s fingers are identical to arterial border zones. However, the fact that many MS lesions bear a relationship with arterial border zones has been clearly established, not least in the several detailed studies of thousands of lesions that we cite from other groups. Second, we do not claim that oligodendrocytes’ metabolic demands are generally as high as those of neurons. We do claim that oligodendrocytes are particularly vulnerable to hypoxia, and this is the experience of many investigators. We devote a section to this topic in our manuscript.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    6. On 2017 Oct 17, Franz Schelling commented:

      It is a pity this paper deepens two elementary misconceptions: (1) The assumption the MS-specific ventricle-based lesion-formations (Dawson's fingers) were identical with arterial border-zone lesions - as the latter occasionally touch the ventricular border. (2) The opinion, the oligodendrocytes' metabolic demands were generally as high as those of the neurons. Not only the given authors but also the public at large can only be recommended to study the pertinent evidence more carefully so as not to fall prey to easily reiterated mistaken assumptions regarding these pivotal points.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 17, Hiroshi Yao commented:

      Dear Harald HHW Schmidt, Thank you for your comments on our paper (Int J Mol Sci 2017 Oct 11). I was engaged in our paper (PLoS ONE 2015), when the paper by Kleikers et al. was published. So I could not know this paper at that time, and it was my mistake not to pay attention for this paper during the next 2 years; I am sorry for this. I will comment on this paper in the near future using PubMed Commons. Sincerely yours, Hiroshi Yao, M.D.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 12, Harald HHW Schmidt commented:

      It is highly surprising that in this review the systematic review and meta-analysis followed by a pre-clinical randomised confirmatory trial which clearly excluded NOX2 as a target in ischemic stroke was overlooked. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep13428


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 23, Thales Batista commented:

      Erratum

      In September/October 2017, the Journal of the Brazilian College of Surgeons (Rev Col Bras Cir. 2017;44(5):530-44) published the original article titled “A proposal of Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology for standardizing cytoreductive surgery plus hypertermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy procedures in Brazil: pseudomixoma peritonei, appendiceal tumors and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma.” (http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-69912017005016), by Thales Paulo Batista; Bruno José Queiroz Sarmento; Janina Ferreira Loureiro; Andrea Petruzziello; Ademar Lopes; Cassio Cortez Santos; Cláudio de Almeida Quadros; Eduardo Hiroshi Akaishi; Eduardo Zanella Cordeiro1; Felipe José Fernández Coimbra; Gustavo Andreazza Laporte; Leonaldson Santos Castro; Ranyell Matheus Spencer Sobreira Batista; Samuel Aguiar Júnior; Wilson Luiz Costa Júnior; Fábio Oliveira Ferreira; Comitê de Neoplasias Peritoneais e Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Oncológica. The following errors were identified:

      Title:

      Reads: “A proposal of Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology for standardizing cytoreductive surgery plus hypertermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy procedures in Brazil: pseudomixoma peritonei, appendiceal tumors and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma”;

      Should read: “A proposal of Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO/SBCO) for standardizing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) procedures in Brazil: pseudomixoma peritonei, appendiceal tumors and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma.”.

      Authors:

      Reads: “Thales Paulo Batista; Bruno José Queiroz Sarmento; Janina Ferreira Loureiro; Andrea Petruzziello; Ademar Lopes; Cassio Cortez Santos; Cláudio de Almeida Quadros; Eduardo Hiroshi Akaishi; Eduardo Zanella Cordeiro1; Felipe José Fernández Coimbra; Gustavo Andreazza Laporte; Leonaldson Santos Castro; Ranyell Matheus Spencer Sobreira Batista; Samuel Aguiar Júnior; Wilson Luiz Costa Júnior; Fábio Oliveira Ferreira; Comitê de Neoplasias Peritoneais e Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Oncológica”

      Should read: “Thales Paulo Batista; Bruno José Queiroz Sarmento; Janina Ferreira Loureiro; Andrea Petruzziello; Ademar Lopes; Cassio Cortez Santos; Cláudio de Almeida Quadros; Eduardo Hiroshi Akaishi; Eduardo Zanella Cordeiro1; Felipe José Fernández Coimbra; Gustavo Andreazza Laporte; Leonaldson Santos Castro; Ranyell Matheus Spencer Sobreira Batista; Samuel Aguiar Júnior; Wilson Luiz Costa Júnior; Fábio Oliveira Ferreira; on behalf of the BSSO/SBCO Committee on Peritoneal Surface Malignancies and HIPEC”

      Abstract:

      Reads: “hypertermic”

      Should read: “hyperthermic”

      Rev Col Bras Cir. 2017 Nov-Dec;44(6):665. doi: 10.1590/0100-69912017006016. PMID: 29267565 DOI: 10.1590/0100-69912017006016


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 13, John Tucker commented:

      In this article, Dr. Goldstein et. al raise the pressing issue of drug pricing. They conduct several regression analyses to determine the influence of market changes on oncology drug prices, including labeling changes, off-label use, and the approval of competing drugs on cumulative price increases. Most notably, however, the article serves as a vehicle for the price charts shown in Figures 1 and 2, showing cumulative price increases that are asserted to greatly outstrip the BLS Medical Care Consumer Price Index. The implication of these figures is that drug prices have risen even faster than healthcare prices overall, and thus play a unique role in the rapidly rising cost of care.

      Unfortunately, the paper contains several errors that undercut support for this claim. The key figures show a 39% increase in the BLS Medical Care Price Index from 2005 to 2017, but reference to the primary source shows the increase was 49%. The authors appear to have confused the Medical Commodities CPI, which mainly addresses the costs of pharmaceuticals and medical devices, with the more broadly based Medical Care CPI.

      Simultaneously, drug price increases are overstated by reliance on Average Sales Price data from CMS uncorrected for 340B discounts. The 340B program mandates discounts of 30 to 50% to hospitals meeting certain criteria related to providing services to low income population, and now includes approximately 1/3 of U.S. hospitals. The program has grown at double digit per annum rates over the time period covered by the Goldstein analysis. Genentech recently disclosed that 17% of its worldwide drug sales were conducted under 340B contracts, which would be approximately 35% of U.S. sales.

      Correcting for the effects of the 340B program using publicly available data on the size of the program and hospital/clinic drug expenditures, one finds that the great majority of the price increases discussed in the paper fall below the medical inflation rate described by the BLS Medical Services CPI, and most fall below the general inflation rate as well.

      Overall, there is inarguably a pressing need to control healthcare costs in the U.S. To achieve this we need to look at all sectors of spending, and should expect significant sacrifices across the board. Drug prices will be one part of that, but unnecessary and low value care provision, medical salaries, and insurer overhead will surely play an important role as well.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 04, Nilesh Banavali commented:

      The authors use a few different nucleic acid duplex parameters to understand the extent of B-form RNA structure in the 6S RNA variant structural model reported in this article. A different structural analysis based on Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD) from canonical A-form and B-form single-strand structures can also address the occurrence and extent of local and global B-form structure. A short description of this analysis on the 6S RNA variant structure is posted on bioRxiv at:

      http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/242503v1

      Nilesh Banavali, Research Scientist, Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 21, Sudheendra Rao commented:

      Just an addition since KU955594 was not found in the paper. Literature search suggests that the probable zika strain used to detect seropositivity in India back in 1954 was Zika virus/M.mulatta-tc/UGA/1947/MR-766 (KU955594). Supporting literature is here http://www.jimmunol.org/content/jimmunol/72/4/248.full.pdf http://www.jimmunol.org/content/jimmunol/68/4/461.full.pdf http://www.jimmunol.org/content/jimmunol/68/4/441.full.pdf BLAST results indicate 86-89% identity at nucleotide level of Zika virus/M.mulatta-tc/UGA/1947/MR-766 to Indian strains gb|MF173409, gb|MF173410, gb|MF173411 whereas protein identity is patchy ranging from 81-100% in some regions.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 15, Erick H Turner commented:

      Beyond the question of whether unpublished data were used, how were they used?

      This study asks the important question, what proportion of systematic reviews searched for and made use of unpublished data? However, an important follow-up question remains to be addressed: Among those cases in which unpublished data was used, how was it used? Unpublished data can of course address study publication bias, ie. data from unpublished studies can be simply added to data obtained from the published literature. However, unpublished data can also address outcome reporting bias,[1-3] ie. a trial publication conveys that the intervention is safe and/or effective while unpublished data on the same trial tell a different story. For example, in a study of 74 industry-sponsored antidepressants trials,[4] in addition to 23 (31%) unpublished trials, we found 11 (15%) trials with outcome reporting bias. If we had corrected for the former while ignoring the latter, we would have obtained an effect size estimate that was still inflated. Returning to the current study,[5] an informative follow-up would be to look within the cohort of systematic reviews that made use of unpublished data and determine how many used it to verify the published results.

      References:

      1 Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2010;340:c365.

      2 Chan A-W, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ 2005;330:753. doi:10.1136/bmj.38356.424606.8F

      3 Chan A-W, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004;291:2457–65. doi:10.1001/jama.291.20.2457

      4 Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, et al. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 2008;358:252–60. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa065779

      5 Ziai H, Zhang R, Chan A-W, et al. Search for unpublished data by systematic reviewers: an audit. BMJ Open 2017;7:e017737. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017737


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 06, Rima Obeid commented:

      Oversampling a high risk group and sampling from a hospital setting where kids were born and later treated for autism (a single Center study) strongly suggest a selection bias. Selection bias limits the external validity and generalizability of results from the Boston cohort. Recent metaanalysis and other large studies do not show an association or show even inverse association (example of links below). Moreover, sensitivity analysis is missing in the study by Raghavan et al.<br> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29026508 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29299606


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Dec 12, M Daniele Fallin commented:

      True! This is an "enriched risk" ASD cohort in that it was over-sampled for pre-term birth, a consistent risk factor for ASD. In a low-risk or general US population, you would expect somewhere between 1 and 2% based on current CDC estimates of 8 year olds, although the prevalence at younger ages, and in diverse ethnic populations (such as this one) is less clear. This enriched risk design makes the study of ASD possible in this birth cohort (enough ASD events), and is a common design in ASD prospective studies - although typically the risk enrichment is due to family history (baby sibling studies).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Dec 06, Aiguo Ren commented:

      86 out of 1257 infants (6.8%) had ASD in this cohort! Isn't this incidence too high?


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 09, Franz Schelling commented:

      The paper https://doi.org/10.24019/jtavr.29 addresses only the point of how a one-sided valvular incompetence of the internal jugular veins endangers the brain. It must not be forgotten, though: the blood contained in the jugulars is driven in direction of the brain as often as these veins are impacted upon - but can't empty themselves, quickly enough, in the normal way.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 09, Franz Schelling commented:

      The hemodynamics of the human brain won't ever be understood ... if the intracranial venous anatomy is not contemplated in its natural context with the extracranial venous and perivenous anatomy and especially its functional changes; the position-dependent strictures and at times tempestuous impacts which the cerebral venous passages located outside the skull are exposed to. Rather than in replacing Newtonian principles with statistical ones, we might make progress in coming to terms with the individually given intricacies of venous hemodynamics. Admittedly a tedious task, showing a humbling underdevelopment of venous computational hemodynamics.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Oct 08, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      This study is important in relationship to how lymph from the brain is deposited back into the blood stream, as this occurs at the junction where the jugular valve is located. Lymph, CSF and blood all go thru this area, and if there is reflux or slowed flow, the brain is negatively affected.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 06, Pete Monk commented:

      LHFPL4 is not a member of the tetraspanin family, as defined by HUGO (https://www.genenames.org/cgi-bin/genefamilies/set/768). It is in the LHFPL tetraspan subfamily (https://www.genenames.org/cgi-bin/genefamilies/set/1489) and likely has a very different structure to the tetraspanins. The title is therefore misleading.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 01, Randi Pechacek commented:

      Kaisa Koskinen, one of the authors of this paper, wrote a blog post on microBEnet describing some background to the research.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 15, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      Blaustein’s attemps to disqualify Vogeser’s studies started with the false assertion that the analytical protocol did not assess the degree of recovery of the extraction step [1]. Now he presents imaginative speculations about unknown compounds and on a low level of noise in Vogeser’s chromatograms. Blaustein’s defamatory accusations are unfounded. They do not change the fact that Ouabain can not be detected in human serum by using state-of-the-art analytical methods. In the e-pub-first version of his article, Blaustein reports that Clin Chim Acta has refused to retract the Vogeser publication, with good reason. In the assessment of experts in analytical chemistry there is no doubt on the validity of Vogeser’s measurements.

      [1] http://hyper.ahajournals.org/content/64/4/680/tab-e-letters


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2018 Jan 13, Mordecai P Blaustein commented:

      Response to Dr. Füerstenwerth:

      The case for a ouabain-Na pump endocrine system has been laid out in [1] and my previous response to Dr. Fürstenwerth. All the original reports are cited so that readers can verify my statements.

      I must, however, refute Fürstenwerth’s false claim that I made an “unfounded accusation of data manipulation” by stating that Baecher et al. [2] “’edited’ their raw data”. Fürstenwerth apparently has not read Vogeser and Baecher’s Letter to the Editor [3] in which they admit that “In… Fig. 2 of our article ([2])… at a retention time (RT)… of… 5.0 min… the trace signal is broken… This inconsistency was introduced by editing the… (mass spectrum) raw data.” They show (Fig. 2, top, in [3]) that they originally (Fig. 2, top, in [2]) edited out an ion current peak at 4.99 min, and they present a second example (Fig. 1, top, in [3]) in which a similar peak is seen at that same RT (4.98 min) (see [4] Data Supplement). They do not mention the other 28 plasma samples they tested [2]; how many of them exhibited the same peak? Why didn’t they show/describe all their data? (The “broken” trace signal in Fig. 2 of [2] is very difficult to see on the original journal page. Dr. Hamlyn suspected that the spectrum was 'unusually flat'. When he enlarged the image he discovered the discontinuity.) We suggest [4] that the ion current peak at the 5.0 min RT, which has the same mass/charge ratio as ouabain, may correspond to the more polar of two ouabain isomers that have previously been described [5, 6]. Other flaws in the Baecher et al. study [2] are discussed elsewhere [1, 4, 7].

      References:

      [1] Blaustein MP, 2018

      [2] Baecher S, 2014

      [3] Vogeser M, 2015

      [4] Hamlyn JM, 2016

      [5] Jacobs BE, 2012

      [6] Hamlyn JM, 2014

      [7] Blaustein MP, 2015


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2018 Jan 12, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      Final response to Dr. Blaustein

      <p>@ 1: yes, S. kombé contains a mixture of steroids, but contrary to Blaustein’s assertion no ouabain. Kirk discovered the effects of k-strophanthin.</p>

      <p>@ 2: yes, inactivating mutation of the mouse alpha-2 Na+ pump ouabain binding site has physiologic consequences. This is no evidence that the endogenous inhibitor of the NaK-pump is ouabain.</p>

      <p>@ 3: unfounded accusation of data manipulation (”edited their raw data”, “scientific misconduct”) does not refute the fact that in various laboratories it has not been possible to detect ouabain in human serum with highly specific analytical methods.</p>

      <p>@ 4: With the admission that ”ouabain can be expected to have both beneficial and … detrimental effects” Blaustein refutes assertions he has made in his article: “ouabain is a key factor in the pathogenesis of hypertension and heart failure" and “ouabain and its receptor site participate in the pathogenesis of hypertension, cardiac hypertrophy and HF“. Provided ouabain is the endogenous inhibitor of the NaK-pump that at low levels has positive but at elevated levels has detrimental effects, then it remains puzzling why infusion of plant derived ouabain (elevating serum concentration!) in clinical practice lowers blood pressure and is life-saving in acute heart failure. (Oh yes, common sense can be annoying.)</p>

      <p>@ 5: With highly specific analytical methods it is not possible to detect “endogenous ouabain”. (Blaustein admits that there is no ”convenient EO assay.”) However, concentrations of plant derived ouabain can be measured even in extreme low concentrations. From such measurements the therapeutic levels of ouabain serum concentrations are known and have been validated by decades of clinical experience. Thus, effective therapeutic dosing of ouabain is a well established procedure.</p>

      <p>@ 6: The sophisticated total syntheses of ouabain are high-lights in synthetic chemistry. These masterpieces allow the preparation of a few mg on laboratory scale, but they are not suited for large scale production of ouabain.</p>

      Finally, I do agree with Blaustein that in science many notions have landed in the trash bin of history. I dare to predict that ”endogenous ouabain” , too, will suffer that fate.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2018 Jan 12, Mordecai P Blaustein commented:

      Response to Dr. Fürstenwerth

      I thank Dr. Fürstenwerth for his comments about my article. His exuberant advocacy for the clinical use of ouabain is refreshingly entertaining. As he states, however, his views are based largely on “applying common sense”; he appears to ignore the experimental method and actual data. (“Common sense” also led to such ideas as, “the earth is flat,” and “the sun revolves around the earth” – notions that landed in the trash bin of history.)

      1. Fürstenwerth correctly asserts that k-strophanthin is the predominant cardenolide extracted from Strophanthus kombé, but this plant produces a mixture of related steroids [1].

      2. He states that the “endogenous ouabain-Na+ pump endocrine system… is… wishful thinking.” Data from multiple laboratories, summarized in my article, demonstrate that an inactivating mutation of the mouse alpha-2 Na+ pump ouabain binding site, or infusion of anti-ouabain antibodies to immuno-neutralize endogenous ouabain (EO) in rats, induces a clear phenotype. This loss of EO-Na+ pump interaction is manifested by specific disturbances of (e.g.) behavior and learning, exercise endurance, fetal development and basal blood pressure. In my view, these data trump Fürstenwerth’s “common sense”.

      3. He claims that “There is no endogenous ouabain.” Has he read (or understood) the articles listed in Table 2A? Rather than relying on “common sense”, I prefer the mass spectra and NMR spectra published by such distinguished chemists/biochemists as Prof. Wilhelm Schoner [2], Prof. Tadashi Inagami [3], and Prof. Koji Nakanishi [4], a member of the National Academy of Sciences USA and one of the world’s leading natural product chemists. Moreover, the very detailed original mass spectroscopy report included all the original, rigorous purification data [5-7]. In contrast, the few investigators who were unable to detect EO (Table 2C) cut methodological corners (see text and [8]) and even “edited” their raw data [9,10] (and see [8]).

      4. Fürstenwerth claims that my review “neglects” the “beneficial” effects of ouabain and “does not discuss (the)... obvious contradictions” that “ouabain lowers blood pressure, (but also) produces hypertension”. His statement is not true. Table 3 shows that mutation (inactivation) of the alpha-2 Na+ pump ouabain binding site elevates basal blood pressure; this implies that EO is normally needed to help keep blood pressure low (i.e., ‘normal’). On the other hand, Yuan et al. [11] were just the first of numerous investigators to show that prolonged, high ouabain levels elevate blood pressure. Like all hormones, ouabain can be expected to have both beneficial and, if greatly elevated for a prolonged period, detrimental effects (see Fig. 4 and pages C14 and C16 of my article).

      5. I do not dispute Fürstenwerth’s assertion that the “decisive factor is the (ouabain) serum concentration”. But, in that case, given the aforementioned data, his opposition to my call for “solid information” about plasma EO/ouabain levels before and during ouabain therapy makes no sense. Drug treatment based simply on “common sense” must give way to effective therapeutic dosing that utilizes all the available scientific information to optimize treatment and patient safety.

      6. Finally, Fürstenwerth states that “production of Strophanthus glycosides is… restricted to collection of wild plants.” This is not true. The complete chemical synthesis of ouabain was achieved by Deslongchamps [12] and a more concise method has now been developed [13].

      In conclusion, as Withering wrote in 1785 [14], “After all, in spite of opinion, prejudice or error, Time will fix the real value upon this discovery, and determine whether I have imposed upon myself and others, or contributed to the benefit of science and mankind”.

      References:

      [1] Jacobs & Hoffman, J Biol Chem 69: 153-163, 1926.

      [2] Schneider R, 1998

      [3] Tamura M, 1994

      [4] Kawamura A, 1999

      [5] Hamlyn JM, 1991

      [6] Ludens JH, 1991

      [7] Mathews WR, 1991

      [8] Hamlyn JM, 2016

      [9] Baecher S, 2014

      [10] Vogeser M, 2015

      [11] Yuan CM, 1993

      [12] Reddy MS, 2009

      [13] Renata H, 2015

      [14] Withering, “An Account of the Foxglove and Some of its Medical Uses”, M. Swinney for G.G.J. and J. Robinson, Birmingham, 1785.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    5. On 2018 Jan 12, Mordecai P Blaustein commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    6. On 2018 Jan 08, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      the mistreated gift from paradise

      In the final version of his article Blaustein again reveals his ignorance of the history of Ouabain and Strophanthus glycosides. It is not true that Ouabain is found in Strophanthus kombé. The glycoside occurring in S. kombé is k-strophanthin. Ouabain is found in both Acokanthera ouabaio and Strophanthus gratus. Herman Thoms isolated the pure glycosides from S. kombé and S. gratus in 1904 and has unambiguously assigned them with the names k- and g-strophanthin [1].

      Based on the work of Thomas Fraser, Burroughs, Wellcome & Co in 1886 introduced a S. kombé extract called "Tincture of Strophanthus". This was sold at seven shillings per ounce. In America, E.R. Squibb and Sons was one of the first suppliers of Strophanthus preparations. Particularly popular was a chocolate coated tablet of a mixture of Digitalis and Strophanthus extracts, which was sold at 16 cents per one hundred pieces [2]. In 1889, Boehringer Mannheim introduced pure k-strophanthin to the market. In cooperation with Albert Fraenkel Boehringer in 1907 introduced a solution of k-strophanthin for intravenous administration under the brand name “Kombetin”.

      In 1904 E. Merck, Darmstadt, commercialized a standardized solution of pure g-strophanthin as "g-Strophanthin crystallisatum after Thoms". In 1906, also Kali-Chemie began marketing a g-strophanthin solution under the trade name “Purostrophan”. In the following years, several suppliers offered Strophanthus glycosides preparations for oral and intravenous use. In contrast to Blaustein's assertion orally administered ouabain products over the decades of their use have been given as standard medication to millions of patients. The database of the German Institute for Medical Documentation and Information records more than 20 orally administered ouabain preparations that were used in Germany after 1950. Decades of clinical experience with dozens of ouabain based preparations (i.e. treatment of millions of patients) can not be disqualified as „anecdotal“.

      Blaustein's core hypothesis is that “ouabain is a key factor in the pathogenesis of hypertension and heart failure". At the same time he states that ouabain is “equipotent to digoxin” and has been used “for acute iv administration in heart failure emergencies“. By applying common sense, it can be ruled out that a substance that has been used successfully for decades as an emergency drug in the treatment of heart failure will cause heart failure. Equally excluded is that ouabain, which in clinical practice lowers blood pressure, produces hypertension. Already Fraser had pointed out that “strophanthin increases the action of the heart without raising blood pressure.” Blaustein does not discuss these obvious contradictions nor does he suggest an explanation. He as well neglects current reports on cardio protection induced by ouabain as well as conclusions by Lijune Liu and co-workers that ouabain can be beneficial to various stages of heart failure.

      Based on all available data it can be ascertained that the mutually exclusive effects of plant derived ouabain and the inhibitor of the Na/K-ATPase observed in mammalian tissues do not support the hypothesis that this inhibitor is identical with ouabain, but favor the interpretation that “endogenous ouabain” is something different. Hence, Blaustein's request to establish "solid information about the normal plasma EO level under a variety of conditions" is unfounded. There is no endogenous ouabain.

      African healers have long recognized the medical value of Strophanthus extracts. The medical application relied on alcoholic decotions made by steeping roots in a fermented, alcoholic beverage. The resulting bitter tasting solution would be taken in small sips over a period of days or weeks [2]. The healers knew that the effect of Strophanthus as a potent plant with both healing and highly toxic capabilities, crucially depends on the method of preparation of the drug. In 1971 this observation found a decisive scientific confirmation. Lindenbaum et al published findings that different batches of digoxin from the same manufacturer resulted in different serum concentrations [3]. This publication and subsequent studies lead to the transformation of the art of galenics from a trial-and-error exercise into a scientific discipline. Contrary to Blaustein's assertion, today we know from progress in pharmacology and galenics that absolute bioavailability is not decisive for the therapeutic effect. The only decisive factor is the serum concentration, which enables a sustained therapeutic effect. This is achieved by a correspondingly optimized galenic formulation of the active substance. Different formulations require different dosages to produce the same serum concentration. This is the explanation for the different concentrations of ouabain preparations cited by Blaustein. Contrary to Blaustein's assertion the therapeutic serum concentrations of ouabain are well known: 0.5 ng/ml in steady-state after iv administration and 0.4-0.9 ng/ml on oral administration of suitable galenic preparations.

      Blaustein argues on the basis of outdated knowledge that does not take into account the effects of galenics. Today drugs such as Aliskiren, whose absorption rate is about 3%, will not be rejected just because the absorption rate is too low. Aliskiren’s therapeutic effects derive from sufficiently high serum concentrations, not from the total amount absorbed. The same is true for drugs like Nisoldipine (5%), Dabigatranetextilat (6.5%), or Ramipril (15%), which have absorption rates comparable to that of ouabain. For ouabain, absorption rates of up to 10% have been measured.

      Blaustein falsely assumes that Ouabain has been withdrawn from the market because there has been a death following intravenous administration. The anecdotal evidence he refers to is a patient with multiple co-morbidities. It is outright medical malpractice to inject 0.75 mg ouabain in such a patient when the standard dose should not exceed 0.25 mg.

      Ouabain preparations are no longer available because no company was willing to fund the required clinical trials. The historical preference of Digitalis glycosides over Strophanthus glycosides is due to two factors. 1. Digitalis glycosides can be produced at low cost on an industrial scale from commercial Digitalis plantations. The production of Strophanthus glycosides is and was restricted to collection of wild plants and is correspondingly expensive. 2. Cardiac glycosides were used with the aim of strengthening the contraction force of the heart muscle. Since digitalis glycosides have a stronger inotropic effect than Strophanthus glycosides, the former were preferred. Additionally, false ideas about the importance of galenics have certainly contributed to the uncertainty of clinicians.

      For the locals in Africa, Strophanthus was poison and remedy in one. In the mythology of the tribe of the Wilé in Upper Volta, this plant was sent from paradise to the earth to heal or punish people according to their merit [4]. Hence, it is an ethical obligation when studying Strophanthus glycosides to apply generally accepted principles in science. Otherwise hubris and personal vanity will hinder finding the truth. Mordecai P. Blaustein breaks with this generally accepted principles in science. He ignores ideas and data that don’t fit his preconceptions and neglects conflicting results that don’t support his hypotheses. Blaustein’s narrative about the construction of an "endogenous ouabain-Na+ pump endocrine system" lacks a necessary critical perspective. It is guided by wishful thinking and not by facts.

      References

      [1] https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-40381-5_7

      [2] Osseo-Asare AD, Bitter roots: the search for healing plants in Africa, The University of Chicago Press, 2014

      [3] Lindenbaum J, 1971

      [4] Leuenberger H, Gesund durch Gift, Deutsche Verlagsanstalt Stuttgart, 1972


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    7. On 2017 Dec 13, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    8. On 2017 Nov 15, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    9. On 2017 Nov 14, Mordecai P Blaustein commented:

      The topic of "ouabain as a therapeutic agent" is discussed in the print version of this article ("The Pump, the Exchanger and the Holy Spirit..."). The print version will be published in the December 2017 issue of Am J Physiol Cell Physiol.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    10. On 2017 Nov 06, Hauke Fürstenwerth commented:

      Are clinical experiences not relevant?<br> In medical research, decisive results are obtained by clinical experiences. Hence, new hypotheses need to be checked for clinical findings and observations. Ouabain and the related Strophanthus glycoside k-strophanthin by default have been used for more than a century to treat heart diseases. Cymarin and convallatoxin have also been used. As early as 1904, a standardized solution of pure ouabain was commercialized by E. Merck, Darmstadt as “g-Strophanthin crystallisatum nach Thoms”. This ouabain solution was used both intravenously [7] and orally administered in the treatment of heart diseases. In 1909, the French physician Henri Vaquez introduced the intravenous application of ouabain (“Ouabain-Arnaud”) in France. In World War I medical personnel in the German army by order of the ambulance corps exclusively used ouabain solutions to treat heart failure [4]. The therapeutic profile and the disease profiles for which the use of Strophanthus glycosides is appropriate are documented in many reports on clinical experiences and have been summarized in numerous reviews, preferably in the German literature [10]. As early as the first half of the 20th century distinguished scientists such as Albert Fraenkel, University of Heidelberg, and Ernst Edens, University of Dusseldorf, have published monographs [8,5] that document in detail the clinical effects of Strophanthus glycosides. In textbooks ouabain has been praised as "the biggest advance in cardiac therapy since Withering in 1785" [6]. Decades of clinical experience with ouabain provide a yardstick by which all research results and hypotheses related to ouabain have to be measured. Observations at the bedside are more meaningful than speculative hypotheses based on experimental research.

      In his article Mordecai P. Blaustein gives no reference to the comprehensive literature on clinical experience with ouabain. Although he concludes from his hypotheses that “ouabain and its receptor site participate in the pathogenesis of hypertension, cardiac hypertrophy and HF“ he does not even mention the fact that ouabain has been used successfully in medical therapy of heart failure.

      Contrary to well-documented positive clinical experience in the treatment of heart disease with ouabain, Blaustein asserts that ouabain damages the cardio-vascular system. He neglects current reports on cardio protection induced by ouabain [13,15,19] as well as conclusions by Lijune Liu and co-workers that ouabain can be beneficial to various stages of heart failure [14]. Blaustein asserts that ouabain raises blood pressure in humans, but at the same time admits that ouabain increases blood pressure only in selected rodents strains, because the susceptibility to ouabain-induced hypertension is genetically-determined. Thus there is no evidence to suggest that ouabain is hypertensinogenic in humans. In clinical experience a reduction of high blood pressure in patients is observed on treatment with ouabain [9].

      Blaustein asserts that in more than two centuries of clinical use of digoxin no hints have been found that digoxin is hypertensinogenic. However, it is common knowledge that Digitalis as well as Strophanthus glycosides in high enough concentration increase blood pressure [1,8]. The effects of cardiac glycosides are very sensitive to the applied dosage. Cardiac glycosides are prototypical examples of hormetic substances [10]. The hormetic nature of ouabain is also observed in the effect on signal transduction. According to the studies quoted by Blaustein in his article, low concentrations of ouabain activate signaling cascades, while high concentrations inhibit them.

      Ouabain has been used in clinical application to treat digitalis intoxication in patients. Corresponding reports are documented as early as 1902. Recent in vitro and in vivo studies confirm this well-known clinical observation [16]. So contrary to Blaustein’s hypothesis that digoxin prevents negative effects of ouabain, in clinical practise ouabain has been shown to prevent damage from digoxin. It is a frequently reported observation that Strophanthus glycosides also work in patients in whom digitalis glycosides have no effect, see for example the publication of the renowned cardiologists Franz Groedel and Bruno Kisch [11].

      The therapeutic effects of k-and g-strophanthin are largely identical, ouabain being slightly more potent than k-strophanthin [8,17]. In a double blind cross-over study Agostoni compared the effects of k-strophanthin and digoxin in 22 patients with advanced congestive heart failure [2]. K-strophanthin improved functional performance while digoxin failed to provide such results. Norepinephrine plasma level at rest was significantly lowered by k-strophanthin but not by digoxin.

      Based on all available data it can be ascertained that the mutually exclusive effects of ouabain and the inhibitor of the Na/K-ATPase observed in mammalian tissues do not support the hypothesis that this inhibitor is identical with ouabain, but favor the interpretation that “endogenous ouabain” is something different.

      Blaustein asserts that Hamlyn identified two ouabain isomers in rodent plasma that are absent from commercial (plant) ouabain. This assertion is not backed by the corresponding Hamlyn publication [12]. Therein Hamlyn reports the presence of several substances in plasma of pregnant rats that show immunoreactivity. Two substances are chromatographically slightly different from ouabain and have different mass spectra. Hamlyn does not provide any data for the elucidation of the chemical structure. The chemical structure of these products is unknown. So it is not justified to claim that these substances are isomers of ouabain.

      Nor does the existence of these unknown compounds in plasma of rats suggest that endogenous ouabain is of animal origin. A comparison of substances found in unpurified plasma with purified ouabain - ie free from impurities - is meaningless. Provided that these substances will be identified by structural analysis as isomers of ouabain then it still has to be examined whether these substances are also found in Strophanthus or Acokanthera extracts.

      References

      [1] Abelmann WH, 1973<br> [2] Agostoni PG, 1994<br> [4] https://sites.google.com/a/aryapa.faith/iosifpravin/albert-fraenkel-ein-arztleben-in-licht-und-schatten-1864-1938-reihe-ecomed-biographien-3609162600

      [5] Edens E, Die Digitalisbehandlung [Digitalis treatment] , Third edition, Berlin-München, Verlag Urban&Schwarzenberg, 1948

      [6] Eichholtz F, Lehrbuch der Pharmakologie [Textbook of Pharmacology], fifth edition, Berlin und Heidelberg, Springer Verlag, 1947.

      [7] Fleischmann P, Wjasmensky H. Ü̈ber intravenöse Strophanthintherapie bei Verwendung von gratus-Strophanthinum crystallisatum Thoms. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 35: 918–921, 1909

      [8] https://books.google.de/books?id=iq-kBgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

      [9] https://doi.org/10.9734/BJMMR/2015/17042

      [10] Fürstenwerth H, 2016

      [11] https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-7125(16)36725-6

      [12] Jacobs BE, 2012

      [13] Lagerstrom CF, 1988

      [14] Liu L, 2016

      [15] Morgan EE, 2010

      [16] Nesher M, 2010

      [17] PFEIFER E, 1960

      [19] Wu J, 2015


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 06, Stuart RAY commented:

      This is a meta-analysis that attempts to correlate mercury exposure with autism spectrum disorders. On page 296 of this report, in the Discussion section, the authors note this first among the limitations of their study: "The major problem with case-control studies is the temporal relationship between exposure and outcome. It is possible, for example, that older children with ASD may exhibit more mouthing behavior than healthy controls, leading to increased levels of mercury (and other pollutants) in their biological tissues." Given this (valid) limitation, the primary conclusion appears to be highly questionable.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 05, Zvi Herzig commented:

      That current e-cigarette use is also significantly associated with previous asthma in this study, strongly suggests undetected confounding and/or reverse causality.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 02, Federico Cabitza commented:

      The Limits of Mind: Extended by Computers, or just distanced from sight?

      In their Perspective [1] (Obermeyer Z, 2017), Obermeyer and Lee claim that computers, ”far from being the problem [of the increasing complexity of contemporary medicine], are the solution” and suggest that, as the inadequacy of “our inborn sensorium” spurred the development of “stethoscopes, electrocardiograms, and radiographs”, likewise the inadequacy of our “inborn cognition” motivates an analogous augmentation by computers.

      However, the mentioned sensorial augmentation amplifies subtle clinical signs offering them at the physicians’ interpretation, while computers would augment cognition in terms of mere textual categories and numerical data, thus often shortcutting intuition, dispelling uncertainty [2] (Simpkin AL, 2016) from clinical reasoning and worse yet potentially biasing interpretation [3] (Goddard K, 2012).

      Understating the irreducible gap between the discreteness of data and the continuous (and partly ineffable) experience of illness in physicians regards the “demise of context” we highlighted [4] when physicians overrely on computer outputs (Cabitza F, 2017).

      While the computers’ potential for pattern recognition in diagnostic imaging is indisputable, the complexity of more clinical applications has so far been irksome to master [5].

      This suggests prudence before entrusting the “future of medicine” to a wider digitization, which can entail unintended bottlenecks.

      Federico Cabitza, PhD; Camilla Alderighi, MD; Raffaele Rasoini, MD;

      1. Obermeyer Z, Lee TH. Lost in Thought — The Limits of the Human Mind and the Future of Medicine. NEJM 2017; 377:1209-1211
      
      2. Simpkin AL, Schwartzstein RM. Tolerating uncertainty—the next medical revolution? NEJM 2016; 375(18): 1713-1715.
      
      3. Goddard K, Roudsari A, Wyatt JC. Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators. JAMIA. 2011;19(1):121-7.
      
      4. Cabitza F, Rasoini R, Gensini GF. Unintended Consequences of Machine Learning in Medicine. JAMA 2017; 318(6): 517–518
      
      5. Ross C, Swetlitz I. IBM Pitched Its Watson Supercomputer as a Revolution in Cancer Care. It's Nowhere Close. Scientific American, 6 september 2017.
      


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 02, Peter Rogan commented:

      We would like to alert readers to the fact that information theory-based splicing mutation analysis has been used to analyze a wide range of variants (in/dels and SNVs) that affect splicing in introns and exons in peer reviewed studies. These tools have been used analyze mutations that alter branchpoint recognition and within introns in peer reviewed studies. The Automated Splice Site and Exon Definition Analysis server, ASSEDA (Mucaki EJ, 2013) analyzes mutations at branchpoints, within intronic sequences, at cryptic splice sites, and at splicing regulatory protein binding sites ("enhancer/silencer" sequences). We have also published the Shannon pipeline (Shirley BC, 2013), which carries out mutation analysis affecting splicing (and transcription factor binding sites; Lu R, 2017) on a genome scale. Veridical is software validates splicing mutations found with the Shannon pipeline (or any other program) with RNASeq data from the same individual (Viner C, 2014, Dorman SN, 2014).

      Our previous review article extensively describes the use of these tools for splicing mutation analysis by many other research groups, besides ourselves (Caminsky N, 2014).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 28, Tanai Cardona commented:

      I had a look at my dataset of D1 sequences from Cyanobacteria. You may find interesting that Ala87 is not unique to plants and actually is a trait of early-evolving atypical D1 sequences (rogue and super-rogue) and also of standard D1 forms of early evolving cyanobacteria, like the marine yellowstone Synechococcus (Ja-3-3Ab) or Synechococcus sp. PCC 7336. It is kind of cool because in my 2015 Mol Biol Evol paper, the plant D1 clustered with this early evolving cyanos.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 03, Kartik Gupta commented:

      The title contains the word "tree oil" and not "tea tree oil". The authors want to convey that this cocktail of commonly used tree-derived oils (tea tree, neem and pine) and kerosene can cause methemoglobinemia.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 25, Tony Larkman commented:

      The title of this report 'Case of methaemoglobinaemia caused by tree oils and kerosene' is misleading because it appears to blame tea tree oil and/or kerosene for the symptoms reported. Apart from the 15% tea tree oil and 20% kerosene in the rat poison the product also contained 40% Neem (azadirachtin) oil and 25% pine oil. These products, which were not mentioned in the title, both contain terpenes and other potentially poisonous compounds when ingested.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 12, Jonathan Eisen commented:

      I believe the claims regarding "beneficial" organisms in this paper are inaccurate and misleading. For example, consider statement in the abstract:

      "While the vast majority of microbial species classified were beneficial"

      No evidence is presented anywhere in the paper that the microbes they identify via sequence analysis are beneficial in any way. I engaged in a Twitter discussion with the senior author of this paper, Chris Mason, about this topic where we discussed my concerns. Details of this discussion are here: https://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2017/11/flaws-in-prediction-of-presence-of.html

      As far as I can tell from this discussion and from the paper, the authors considered all organisms that were not specifically assigned to be a putative pathogen to be beneficial.

      This is simply a flawed approach.

      First, just because they are not assigned to be putative pathogenic does not mean that they are not pathogenic.

      Second, this ignores the possibility that microbes could have no effect. That is, some could be parasitic, some could be beneficial, and some could have no effect - what was the no effect category ignored?

      Third, the DNA could be coming from dead organisms that presumably would not have any significant effects.

      Overall, I believe this paper's claims regarding "beneficial" microbes are inappropriate and misleading.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 15, Nevit Dilmen commented:

      Let's clarify the hypothesis about the potential use of AI in mammography:

      Some cancers which are present in the patient's breast have a footprint on mammography but the human radiologists are unable to detect the sign in some cases.

      AI might help in improving above category.

      AI can NOT help if a cancer has no footprint on a mammogram. Indeed mammograms do not show cancers in some cases and we should not expect any benefit of using AI in those cases. Examples are any tumor that is too small, any tumor outside of the imaged area, dense breasts.

      Much of the effort to improve screening is focused on reading. AI might also help to clarify how much we should expect from mammography itself as a modality. How much human readers are actually missing.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 08, Clive Bates commented:

      A further point to add to Rodu's and Sweanor's excellent critique above. The original authors inexplicably avoid exposing the quantified results in the abstract. Why? These are:

      When asked whether some smokeless tobacco products “are less harmful to a person’s health than cigarettes,”the majority of respondents 66.8%, (95% CI=63.9, 69.6) said “no,” 22.2% (95% CI=20.0, 24.7) said “don’t know,” and 10.9% (95% CI=9.4, 12.8) said “yes.

      So only 10.9% have the answer right - an astonishing misalignment of public perception and reality for which several federal agencies bear contributory responsibility. Given switching from smoking to smokeless radically reduces health risks, this is a very disturbing finding.

      Yet the position is even more troubling than these data suggest. The most appropriate answer is that smokeless tobacco products "are much less harmful" than smoking. American smokeless tobacco is likely in the range 98-100% less harmful than smoking - but merely "less harmful" could mean 10%, 30%, 70% or 98% less harmful, and only the last of these is approximately correct.

      The answer "much less harmful" is not allowed in the HINTS survey for smokeless. However, this response is allowed in the HINTS survey for e-cigarettes. In this survey, only 5.3% correctly say e-cigarettes are "much less harmful" and a further 20.6% say "less harmful" - indicating extensive misperceptions of the magnitude of the risk differential even among those who are not literally wrong in believing these products are less harmful than smoking.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 04, Brad Rodu commented:

      The study by Feirman et al. (Feirman SP, 2018) described in detail the results from one question in the 2012, 2014, and 2015 Health Information National Trends Surveys: “Do you believe that some smokeless tobacco products, such as chewing tobacco and snuff, are less harmful than cigarettes?” The possible answers were “Yes,” “No,” and “Don’t Know.”

      The article highlighted these findings:

      • “A majority of adults do not think smokeless tobacco is less harmful than cigarettes.” (i.e., didn’t answer “yes.”) • “Believing smokeless tobacco is not less harmful than cigarettes declined from 2012–2015.” • “Perceptions about the harm of smokeless tobacco differed by demographic subgroup.”

      The authors, from the U.S. FDA and National Cancer Institute, commented: “…our findings may help inform public health communications aimed at reducing tobacco-related harms. Additionally, understanding consumer perceptions of tobacco products plays an important role in FDA's regulatory work.”

      This claim is not valid because of one glaring omission throughout the article, which contained 3,800 words, 3 large tables of numbers and 58 references. The article failed to specify that the correct answer is: “Yes, smokeless tobacco products are less harmful than cigarettes.” In fact, it focused almost entirely on the majority of participants who inaccurately answered “No” or “Don’t Know,” which reflects misperception fostered by an effective “quarantine” of truthful risk information by federal agencies (Kozlowski LT, 2016).

      Decades of epidemiologic studies have documented that the health risks of smokeless tobacco use are, at most, 2% those of smoking (Rodu B, 2006; Rodu B, 2011; Fisher M 2017; Royal College of Physicians, 2002; Lee PN, 2009). Unlike cigarettes, smokeless tobacco does not cause lung cancer, heart and circulatory diseases or emphysema. In 2002 the Royal College of Physicians concluded: “As a way of using nicotine, the consumption of non-combustible [smokeless] tobacco is on the order of 10–1,000 times less hazardous than smoking, depending on the product.” (Royal College of Physicians, 2002)

      The low risks from smokeless tobacco use even include mouth cancer. A 2002 review documented that men in the U.S. who use moist snuff and chewing tobacco have minimal to no risk for mouth cancer (Rodu B, 2002), and a recent federal study found no excess deaths from the disease among American men who use moist snuff or chewing tobacco (Wyss AB, 2016).

      As one of us recently wrote, “Deception or evasion about major differences in product risks is not supported by public health ethics, health communication or consumer practices. Public health agencies have an obligation to correct the current dramatic level of consumer misinformation on relative risks that they have fostered.” (Kozlowski LT, 2018)

      Brad Rodu Professor of Medicine University of Louisville

      David Sweanor Adjunct Professor of Law Centre for Health Law, Policy and Ethics University of Ottawa

      Brad Rodu is supported by unrestricted grants from tobacco manufacturers to the University of Louisville, and by the Kentucky Research Challenge Trust Fund.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 04, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The medical profession, including medical schools and hospitals, is now a part of the health care industry, and implementation of editorial policies of medical journals is commonly biased in favor of business interests. PubMed Commons has offered the only, albeit constrained, open forum to air dissenting research and opinions in science-based language. Discontinuation of PubMed Commons will silence any questioning of the industry-sponsored promotional publications indexed in PubMed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 25, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The research paper by Lager and colleagues [1] reported the first attempt to compare the sensitivity and specificity of any direct nucleic acid-based test protocols used by different laboratories in detecting the DNA of various borrelial species. Such efforts, if continued, may eventually lead to development of a useful direct test for reliable diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) and should be encouraged worldwide.

      The authors’ statement “PCR is not suitable as a primary diagnostic tool for Lyme borreliosis (LB)” may be too dogmatic. If a PCR test can be proven to be sensitive and specific for reliable diagnosis of LB, there is no reason to reject it as a primary diagnostic tool since several co-authors of this article have stated in a recent position paper that clinicians are advised to avoid serological testing whenever the clinical symptoms are not indicative of LB according to the case definitions because the current serology tests are of little diagnostic value. [2]

      It is no surprise that the authors found that the16S rRNA PCR protocols have a higher analytical sensitivity than the non-16S rRNA PCR protocols and the concordance between the 16S rRNA PCR protocols is high. The bacterial 16S rRNA gene is species-specific, is essential for protein synthesis and does not mutate in our lifetime. Non-16S rRNA genes in a borrelia strain may mutate or be deleted, and may be shared by other species of bacteria.

      However, using real-time PCR to detect a signature segment of borrelial 16S rRNA gene for the diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis is bound to encounter technical difficulties. For clinical diagnostic real-time PCR, the optimal amplicon length is usually less than 150 bp [3], often below 80 bp [4], as illustrated in this article. [1] Since all bacterial species have a 16S rRNA gene consisting of about 1500 bp of DNA with interspecies highly conserved segments and hypervariable segments of sequence intercalated between themselves, PCR primer selections are crucial. The false positive B. hermsii and B. miyamotoi detection in protocols 3, 7 and 8 illustrates the inevitable errors of depending on probe hybridization to distinguish closely related DNA sequences. The authors have finally reached a correct conclusion that “In practice, all 16S PCR-based tests without DNA sequencing of the PCR amplicon for validation are prone to generate this kind of error”. In order to detect Borrelia spielmanii, Borrelia lusitaniae and Borrelia japonica, a pair of more inclusive genus-specific PCR primers [5] may be needed.

      The recommendation “to complement the real-time PCR results with sequencing results” is not practical for the diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. The amplicon generated by real-time PCR primers cannot be used for automated Sanger sequencing because the fragments are too short. If the real-time PCR technology were used to screen patient materials like the blood samples which contain human genomic DNA, there would be many questionable positive results which need to be re-tested by conventional PCR to prepare suitable templates for Sanger reaction.

      In their research as reported [1], the authors distributed cDNA and extracted DNA in water or buffer solution from pure borrelial cultures and normal cerebrospinal fluid spiked with pure borrelial cultures as the testing materials which do not contain human genomic DNA as interfering substances. These experimental designs do not reflect the real conditions the diagnostic laboratories are facing.

      It is recommended that a similar comparative research be conducted by sending out blind-coded EDTA blood samples spiked with different concentrations of various borrelial cultures to different laboratories for a proficiency test survey. There may be more appropriate direct tests out there which are better than real-time PCR for a reliable diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis.

      References

      [1] Lager M, Faller M, Wilhelmsson P, Kjelland V, Andreassen Å, Dargis R, Quarsten H, Dessau R, Fingerle V, Margos G, Noraas S, Ornstein K, Petersson AC, Matussek A, Lindgren PE, Henningsson AJ. Molecular detection of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato - An analytical comparison of real-time PCR protocols from five different Scandinavian laboratories. PLoS One. 2017 Sep 22;12(9):e0185434.

      [2] Dessau RB, van Dam AP, Fingerle V, Gray J, Hovius J, Hunfeld KP, Jaulhac B, Kahl O, Kristoferitsch W, Lindgren PE, Markowicz M, Mavin S, Ornstein K, Rupprecht T, Stanek G, Strle F. To test or not to test? Laboratory support for the diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017 Sep 5. pii: S1198-743X(17)30488-3.

      [3] Ornstein K, Barbour AG. A reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay of Borrelia burgdorferi 16S rRNA for highly sensitive quantification of pathogen load in a vector. Vector borne and zoonotic diseases. 2006; 6:103-12.

      [4] Tsao JI, et al. An ecological approach to preventing human infection: vaccinating wild mouse reservoirs intervenes in the Lyme disease cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 ;101:18159-64.

      [5] Lee SH, et al. DNA sequencing diagnosis of off-season spirochetemia with low bacterial density in Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi infections. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15:11364-86.

      Conflicts of Interest: Sin Hang Lee, MD is the director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory specialized in developing DNA sequencing-based diagnostic tests.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 26, Clive Bates commented:

      So again, we have a study that ignores the central feature of vaping: namely, that it is a human behaviour in which the human user regulates variables like the choice of device and hence coil and wicking configuration, voltage and power settings during operation, and the rate of liquid consumption according to their preferences.

      The formation of volatile aldehydes (VAs) is largely temperature dependent (they are products of thermal decomposition), and increasingly vaping devices include temperature control. But the ultimate control is with the user. A high volume of liquid consumption combined with greater coil surface area can still allow for operation at a moderate temperature even at high power, as the liquid transfers heat away from the coil surface.

      Users will operate the equipment in a way that does not lead to harsh dry puff conditions, with associated high VA formation. This is a key human control feedback that does not exist in laboratory equipment. So experiments that just standardise power settings or volume consumption must take care to validate these are realistic proxies for human use for a particular device. In this paper, many of the coil, power and volume settings combinations were not realistic. That could have been avoided through engaging with people with real practical expertise.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 26, Clive Bates commented:

      I would like to recommend that the authors (and anyone attempting similar experiments) consult experienced users about the way these products are used in practice in order to ensure their work is relevant and realistic. I am posting a critical review of this paper by an experienced vaper, Paul Barnes, a trustee of the New Nicotine Alliance.

      Paul Barnes' review starts here

      An emerging category of electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) are sub-Ohm devices (SODs) that operate at ten or more times the power of conventional ECIGs

      Sub-Ohming has been a feature of vaping for many years with advanced, or hobbyist, users utilising knowledge of Ohms Law and unregulated mechanical mods (“mech-mods”), along with user-made coils to provide an experience customised to suit the individual user.

      As technology has improved, the need for mechanical mods has waned, bringing forth the era of the regulated devices. These contain a chipset to regulate power output (wattage), include safety cut-off (to prevent over-use), and control thermal safety (to prevent cell failures), among other features. These devices can produce similar, or greater, power output compared with the mechanical device.

      Pre-made coils are now the norm for most users. The coils mentioned in this paper - Smok TF-Q4 (1), Smok V8-Q4 (2), Smok V8-T8 (3) and the Smok V8-T10 (4) - present a unique problem for researchers lacking in an understanding of both the technology and the consumer.

      In this paper, all the chosen coils were used at a constant power of 50W, with the Smok V8-T8 coil head being used at varying power levels (50, 75, and 100 Watts).

      Fundamentally, the design of the coil head is suitable for higher power usage, not low power.

      One of the key problems with this approach is the misunderstanding of a) how these devices are used in the real world, and b) the particular user characteristics.

      For example, the Smok TF-Q4 states (screen printed on the coil head itself) that the “best” range (determined by user experience, the resistance of the coil, and knowledge of consumer preferences) for power (in Watts) is between 80-120W - between the medium and the upper end of the coil-head maximum capability of 140 Watts.

      The power ranges for the other coils are as follows (according to manufacturer specifications):

      Smok V8-Q4: 50-180W and "best between" 90-150W

      Smok V8-T8: 50-260W and "best between" 125-180W

      Smok V8-T10: 50-300W and "best between" 130-190W

      Considering that the coil head chosen for the variable power test (Smok V8-T8) has a “best” operating range of 125-180 W, testing at 100 demonstrates an imbalance between the cooling effects of the e-liquid, aerosol generation and airflow - a factor not directly considered in the paper.

      At a measured resistance of 0.15 Ohms - the culmination of eight physical coils arranged in parallel - (assuming the Joyetech Cuboid used measured the resistance accurately), and a power setting of 100W, the voltage applied to the coil head is 5.33V (35.59A).

      Finding a decrease in VA emissions is obvious, given the coil heads fundamental design and operating parameters. In comparison, the Vapor Fi (5) device used demonstrated high levels of VA emissions when used at 11 W (approximately 6.2V), far and above the power that would generate the "dry puff" phenomenon (6); as commonly seen in the older CE4/CE5 clearomisers favoured by some researchers (7).

      The key difference between the VF coil and the Smok coil-heads is in the construction. The Smok coil-heads utilise multiple physical coils inside a single unit, conversely, the VF coil is a single coil unit. Therefore, the entirety of the 6.2V (at 11W) is being applied to a single resistance material. The unique construction of the Smok coil-heads negates this fundamental problem by providing up to 10 distinct coils within the head. The total effect is the same, 5.33V is being applied to the entirety of the head, but distributed across 4, 8 or 10 distinct paths.

      Coupled with the larger surface area and substantially more wicking material, heat dissipation through the wick, aerosolisation and air inhalation, the Smok coil heads are capable of handling much higher voltage, while using substantially more e-liquid, without generating the dry-puff.

      Prior research (8) on the various types of e-cig coil, including a common Sub-Ohm tank and coil, has previously been performed with a focus on nicotine aerosolisation, suggesting that the liquid consumed through vaping is not proportional to nicotine content.

      In summary

      The central point of this paper is to examine the relationship between increasing power applied to a coil or coil-head and increasing VA emissions. Fundamentally, with a coil-head containing multiple physical coils, the total heating area, relative to a single (or even a dual) coil is substantially greater. The amount of wicking material which, when soaked with e-liquid (with or without nicotine) provides a significant cooling effect, is also substantially greater. With more physical coils in the coil-head, the time taken for a coil-head to reach a temperature that is both a) satisfying for the user, and b) includes the possibility of inducing a dry-puff, is much longer. Further, the material used for the coil alters the overall heat capacity; as demonstrated by the "Coil Wrapping" calculator (9).

      In reality, as power to the coil increases, liquid consumption also increases. In real-world scenarios, human users regulate both power and liquid flow to minimise the risk of dry-puff conditions and therefore avoiding increases in VA emissions.

      References

      (1) Smok TF-V4 Coil - UK ECIG Store: [link]

      (2) Smok Tech Store V8-Q4 core: [link]

      (3) Smok Tech Store V8-T8 core: [link]

      (4) Smok Tech Store V8-T10 core: [link]

      (5) VaporFi Platinum II Tank: [link]

      (6) Farsalinos K, Voudris V, Poulas K - E-cigarettes generate high levels of aldehydes only in 'dry puff' conditions [link] Farsalinos KE, 2015

      (7) CE5 Clearomizer Tank - VapeClub: [link]

      (8) Farsalinos K et al - Protocol proposal for, and evaluation of, consistency in nicotine delivery from the liquid to aerosol of electronic cigarette atomizers: [link] Farsalinos KE, 2016

      (9) For example, see Steam Engine Coil Wrapping Calculator [link]


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 30, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      Very interesting study. It is important now to test it on humans because there are doubts about the utility of the EAE model in the MS (1). References: 1. Behan, Peter O., and Abhijit Chaudhuri. "EAE is not a useful model for demyelinating disease." Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders 3.5 (2014): 565-574.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 21, David Mage commented:

      The NEUROKININ 1 RECEPTOR, a.k.a NK1R SUBSTANCE P RECEPTOR and TACR1, has a cytogenetic location on autosome 2 (2p12). The authors report in Table 1 that their 55 "SIDS" cases were 33 male and 22 female, apparently not noticing that the male fraction of 0.60 they do not report, is virtually identical to the SIDS male fraction of almost all SIDS cohorts pooled together. It has been claimed (PMID 5129451) that such consistency must be related to a recessive X-linkage that doesn't exist for this NK1R receptor.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 21, Margaret Hammerschlag commented:

      The data reviewed here is not really new. The CDC's recommendations for screening and treating pregnant women in 1993 have resulted in a dramatic drop in perinatal chlamydia infection. We have seen only one case of chlamydial ophthalmia at my institution over the past 20 years and no cases of chlamydial pneumonia. We used to see 30-40 cases/year before screening. We have confirmed this by seroepidemiologc studies, one recently published online in Sex Transm Dis (Banniettis N, Thumu S, Weedon J, Szigeti A, Chotikanatis K, Hammerschlag MR, Kohlhoff SA. Seroprevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis in inner-city children and adolescents – implications for vaccine development. Sex Transm Dis, in press, 2017.). This is also confirmed by the observation that chlamydial ophthalmia is still very common in countries, like the Netherlands, that do not screen and treat pregnant women (Rours GIJG, Hammerschlag MR, De Faber JTHN, de Groot R, Verkooyen RP. Chlamydia trachomatis as a cause of neonatal conjunctivitis in Dutch infants. Pediatrics 121:e321-326, 2008.) Canada has discontinued neonatal ocular prophylaxis and will focus on expanded screening. Neonatal ocular prophylaxis in ineffective for prevention of perinatal chlamydial infection as we demonstrated in 1989 (Hammerschlag MR, Cummings CC, Roblin PM, Williams TH, Delke I. Efficacy of neonatal ocular prophylaxis for the prevention of chlamydial and gonococcal conjunctivitis. New Engl J Med 320:769-72, 1989.). At this point there is so little neonatal chlamydial infection in the US that treatment trials are not really possible.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 21, Daniel Corcos commented:

      The reason why the reduction in breast cancer mortality is overestimated is because the reason for the lack of efficiency of mammography screening in terms of mortality reduction has not been understood. As cancers are detected by mammography more than one year before physical examination, this must translate in a strong decrease in mortality. The fact that this strong decrease is not observed is due to the fact that mammography leads to a strong increase in cancer incidence (mistakenly considered as overdiagnosis). The barrier I see relates to information about the actual risks of low-dose irradiation.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 21, Thomas Jové commented:

      I would like to warn anyone who could be concerned by the appealing title of this paper. There is no serious evidence of an integron integrase activity in this paper. First, there is no description of the used recombination activity assays (authors refer to previous papers) which turns the paper very difficult to follow. For instance, there is no description of the plasmid content. There is a critical absence of control since Table 4 display "excision efficacy" for every assays (no control in absence of integron, absence of integrase, etc). Then, the efficacy of excision (actually, frequency of excision) is determined as being the ratio of negative or positive PCR (this is also unclear) after transformation of several unexplained plasmid in a Streptococcus strain. Therefore the resulting % most probably reflect the efficiency of PCR rather than the % of excision/integration of GC. A very important point not investigated here (no control) is that is remains unsilved whether the recombination of GC is due to the IntI1 activity or IntI-independant recombination. It is noteworthy to mention that authors did not sequence any PCR product to check the specificty of amplifications. Lastly, there are some very significant signs this paper has not been properly reviewed: (i) The paper contains spelling mistakes in the name of bacteria. (ii) The paper has many wrong claims like the Figure 1 (Structure of integron) in which attC are separated from gene cassette of being part of them. Anyone in the integron field knowns that contrariliy to what is written in the Table 1 the G/TTRRRY does not suffice to determine an attC site. Class 1 integron are not associated to Tn7 but Tn21 transposons (L71), a basic in the integron field. (iii) It is very surprising to have not a single quote of any of the numerous papers from D. Mazel team that is the team leading the field of integron recombinations (iv) The paper was received the 7/09, revised (after reviewing?) the 13/09 and accepted the 14/09 which is far to fast to be honest.

      I would really appreciate Pubmed to reconsider the indexation of such papers, and maybe of this journal in which such papers are regular (at least in my fields).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 17, Stuart RAY commented:

      According to a story on Retraction Watch, the journal's publisher says that they are in the process of retracting this manuscript. Also noted is that the senior author (Christopher A. Shaw) was an author on a prior publication Inbar R, 2016 that made related claims (harm to mice from aluminum in vaccine) and was also retracted; that paper was subsequently republished in Immunology Research Inbar R, 2017.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 20, David Mage commented:

      See Scand J Forensic Sci 2016; 22 (1): Editorial, for an alternative interpretation of these data.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 21, Stuart RAY commented:

      Not apparent from the record above, this is a substantial shift (in terms of the conclusions) from an earlier version of the same analysis, here: Jakobsen JC, 2017


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 03, Frank Lippert commented:

      It is good to see that more basic, fundamental research on SDF, in particular on enamel caries, is being conducted. The strength of this study is undoubtedly the use of a bacterial caries model. However, the inclusion of appropriate controls, such as silver- and fluoride-only interventions at equimolar concentrations to SDF, would have been advantageous. The observed remineralization effect of SDF could have been simply a fluoride effect, similarly to those observed after a fluoride varnish application. The present study did not allow for the determination of the impact of silver on remineralization, and further, more controlled studies will be required.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 18, Clive Bates commented:

      I may have misunderstood the study, but the findings and conclusions seem banal...

      The authors were comparing products that actually exist with products that don't, given all e-cigs are flavoured in some way and flavours are integral to the product. Obviously, the producers don't set out to produce unappealing products, and 'appeal' is central to the role these products play in harm reduction - as low-risk alternatives to smoking. ​The authors discover that unflavoured, low-nicotine vaping products are less popular than those with flavours. Of course, they are... but only in the same way people prefer orange juice that tastes of oranges rather than water, and sausages that taste of meat rather than sawdust.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 14, Denise N Slenter commented:

      The pathway model outlined in Figure 1, including all studied drugs, is available as free machine readable data in WP4189 in WikiPathways: https://www.wikipathways.org/index.php/Pathway:WP4189


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Nov 27, Steven Watterson commented:

      This paper follows on from work developing comprehensive models of cholesterol biosynthesis (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23583456) using systems biology file formats and standards.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 24, Mohammed AlJasser commented:

      The abstract does not match the title. I think the abstract belongs to another article.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 24, Ryszard Grenda commented:

      Thank you; the comment is valid; apologies from the authors for mistake in the review.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Nov 18, Mark Milton commented:

      This article states that "Eculizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the C5a component of the complement system, and this binding leads to blockade of the C5b-9 membrane attack complex while the other functions of the complement are maintained."

      This is incorrect. Eculizumab, specifically binds to the C5, thereby inhibiting its cleavage to C5a and C5b and preventing the generation of the terminal complement complex C5b-9


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 20, Valerie Matarese commented:

      Editors' competencies and editing terminology: a call for improved dialog between two worlds of editors

      Moher et al. offer a detailed list of competencies for “scientific editors,” by which they mean editors of scientific (particularly biomedical) journals. As they explain (with difficulty) in the first sentence, these are editors who set journal policy, oversee the peer review process, and choose manuscripts for publication. In common parlance, these are editors-in-chief, associate editors, and managing editors.

      The authors acknowledge that their list of competencies may also be “useful to other types of editors at biomedical journals, such as technical editors (i.e., those responsible for substantial editing of manuscripts, including re-writing for clarity and language)”. Editors who work “at ... journals” are (or were—few remain today) usually called copyeditors or manuscript editors (as opposed to journal editors). Those few who are still employed by prestigious or well-funded journals may choose to call themselves technical editors, but technical editing and technical writing are terms used (especially in the US) to mean the preparation of reports for technical companies.

      Moher et al. do not acknowledge another type of increasingly important editor, namely the authors' editor—one who edits manuscripts before they are submitted to journals and, often, between peer review and acceptance. These editors, who do not work at journals, also advise researcher-authors on journal policy, peer review practices and publishing ethics (as does the newly proposed publications officer). Unlike the publications officer, though, authors' editors have a half-century of quiet experience during which they have matured an approach to working with researcher-authors, documented in a large body of (albeit difficult to find) literature. How they edit depends on many factors, but there exists a broadly agreed nomenclature to describe the spectrum of possible activities—called “levels of edit.” These levels range from the superficial proofreading and copyediting, to language editing, substantive editing (not “substantial” editing), and developmental editing (two other pertinent language services are translation and medical writing). Many levels of edit involve the handling of scientific and technical content. Thus authors' editors are scientific editors, too.

      Just as it is essential for authors' editors to know about journals' publication policies, it would be useful for journal editors to be familiar with the spectrum of editorial support that researcher-authors use to prepare fit-for-publication manuscripts. This familiarity should begin with an understanding of the editing services offered for sale by journals' very own publishers. It should also include basic knowledge of the levels of edit terminology, an awareness of the settings in which this type of editing is done (e.g. in-house institutional services, freelance professional services, online e-commerce firms), and an appreciation that editing scope and depth (hence, the quality of the edited text) vary greatly depending on the authors' needs and desires, the editors' abilities, the budget and time, and so on. Because authors' editors provide valuable services to researchers worldwide and, consequently, to journal editors, improved dialog between these two worlds of scientific editors will positively impact research publishing.

      Disclosure: I have published two books on editorial support for researchers including Editing Research, a book that investigates and documents the work of authors' editors.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 18, Clive Bates commented:

      No actual evidence is presented that this 'prescribe NRT' intervention works or works better than alternative interventions to reduce child secondhand smoke exposure, such as suggesting parents have a voluntary home smoking policy or take some other sort of action like switching to vaping. Both may be easier for parents to do than quitting completely.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 30, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      Very interesting study. It is important now to test it on humans because there are doubts about the utility of the EAE model in the MS (1). References: 1. Behan, Peter O., and Abhijit Chaudhuri. "EAE is not a useful model for demyelinating disease." Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders 3.5 (2014): 565-574.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 18, Clive Bates commented:

      A couple of great quotes from this report:

      [Linda] Bauld commented “In the UK, regulators endeavour to balance the benefits of e-cigarettes (to help adults quit tobacco smoking) with any potential risks (protecting young people). Our evidence from a number of surveys is reassuring. Although some young people who do not smoke tobacco cigarettes are experimenting with e-cigarettes, this is not leading to regular e-cigarette use. Most experimentation and regular use of e-cigarettes is by young people who already smoke tobacco cigarettes. Importantly, smoking among adolescents is continuing to decline.”

      ...

      John Britton (Nottingham University, Nottingham, UK) added “This study demonstrates again that experimentation with e-cigarettes among young people in the UK rarely leads to uptake of smoking. The findings should therefore help to reassure those who worry that the availability of e-cigarettes is increasing uptake of smoking. Combined with overwhelming evidence that e-cigarettes are helping thousands of UK smokers to quit smoking each year, this is excellent news for public health.”


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 18, Clive Bates commented:

      The Portland State University researchers display little awareness of the deep flaws in their 2015 attention-grabbing "Hidden Formaldehyde" NEJM paper - see Jensen RP, 2015 for the study and comments. Nowhere in the present paper do they check whether their operating conditions are a realistic proxy for user experience and therefore whether their findings have any real-world relevance. They dismiss the controversy over their previous paper as just differences in standardisation.

      However, a major challenge is the lack of standardized analytical protocols. This issue has led to wide variations in interlaboratory results and has contributed to the dichotomy in the literature about electronic cigarettes and their potential health effects.

      No, this diagnosis is incorrect. The wide variation is between researchers who use the products in unrealistic conditions and researchers who recognise the human use control feedback created by dry-puff conditions and so measure the products in realistic conditions. These authors are in the former category.

      Creating a realistic proxy for human use does not appear to have influenced their choice of equiment settings. This was determined by:

      Wattage settings of the battery unit used were 10 W and 15 W. These conditions were chosen to produce amounts total HCHO that could enable them to be conveniently distinguished, with the intent to produce a comparison between various sampling and analytical methods.

      There are no human use considerations at all, as far as I can see. If they don't check for conditions that breach plausible human use, the whole work is unreliable as any sort of guide to e-cigarette health risks or for regulatory policy - just like the last one.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 04, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The medical profession, including medical schools and hospitals, is now a part of the health care industry, and implementation of editorial policies of medical journals is commonly biased in favor of business interests. PubMed Commons has offered the only, albeit constrained, open forum to air dissenting research and opinions in science-based language. Discontinuation of PubMed Commons will silence any questioning of the industry-sponsored promotional publications indexed in PubMed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 21, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The narrative review titled “To test or not to test? Laboratory support for the diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis” by Dessau and colleagues[1] is a position paper of the authors. It is not a systematic review. A systemic review typically involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived a priori, with the goal of reducing bias by identifying, appraising, and synthesizing all relevant studies on a particular topic.[2] The gross biases in this position paper are:

      1.Dessau and colleagues recognized “Lyme borreliosis (LB) is a tick-borne infection caused by Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato.”, namely a bacterial infectious disease. However, the authors proposed using objective signs of clinical presentations to diagnose borreliosis[1], but failed to mention that the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control requires detection of the pathogen’s nucleic acid in a clinical specimen and confirmation by DNA sequencing for diagnosis of any emerging infectious diseases, such as Ebola.[3] According to an official publication of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the state of the art in diagnosing infectious diseases is by molecular approaches[4], in particular by 16S rRNA gene analysis for bacterial infectious diseases, such as anthrax.[5]

      2.Dessau and colleagues stated that “clinicians are advised to avoid serological testing whenever the clinical symptoms are not indicative of LB according to the case definitions”. However, the case definitions which were written by some of the authors of the current position paper are “for reliable epidemiological studies and are of great value in clinical management[6]”, not for reliable diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. In fact, in another recet review, two of the co-authors (Strle and Hovius) of the current narrative review stated on record that “Demonstration of borrelial infection by laboratory testing is required for reliable diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis, with the exception of erythema migrans.” [7] Therefore, at least two of the co-authors of this position paper[1] are advancing an agenda of managing clinical patients of Lyme borreliosis, an infectious disease, without a reliable diagnosis against their own beliefs.

      3.The statement “Laboratory testing for antibodies to B. burgdorferi in serum is necessary for diagnosing suspected manifestations of LB such as Lyme carditis, borrelial lymphocytoma, Lyme arthritis, acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans and possibly other rare LB manifestations” while omitting direct DNA testing of blood for the diagnosis of spirochetemia is biased. At least two of the co-authors of this position paper knew and stated that the early stage of Lyme borreliosis infections “can be treated successfully with a 10–14 day course of antibiotics”, “serodiagnostic tests are insensitive during the first several weeks of infection” and if untreated “within days to weeks, the strains of B. burgdorferi in the United States commonly disseminate from the site of the tick bite to other regions of the body.”[7] Sensitive 16S rRNA gene analysis for the detection of Lyme borreliae in blood samples has been known since 1992.[8-12] Continued suppression of using direct DNA testing for the diagnosis of early Lyme borreliosis infections is no longer acceptable.

      4.The authors of this position paper emphasized “an immune response with clinical findings, such as skin lesions, neurological signs, cardiac involvement (e.g. AV block), or arthritis involving the large joints”, but avoided mentioning that cardiac involvements may be due to myocarditis caused by spirochetes invading the myocardium.[13] The authors focused on management of the immune response in the cases of chronic Lyme neuroborreliosis because “there is no convincing evidence that B. burgdorferi produces any toxin.” It is well known that Treponema pallidum, the spirochetes causing neurosyphilis, also lacks a lipopolysaccharide endotoxin. However, it possesses abundant lipoproteins which induce inflammatory processes.[14] Would these authors recommend not to treat patients suffering from neurosyphilis with antibiotics?

      In summary, this narrative review by Dessau and colleagues contains serious scientific biases and should not be used as materials to influence public health policy decisions or as guidelines to direct clinical practice.

      References

      [1] Dessau RB, van Dam AP, Fingerle V, Gray J, Hovius J, Hunfeld KP, Jaulhac B, Kahl O, Kristoferitsch W, Lindgren PE, Markowicz M, Mavin S, Ornstein K, Rupprecht T, Stanek G, Strle F. To test or not to test? Laboratory support for the diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017 Sep 5. pii: S1198-743X(17)30488-3.

      [2] Uman LS. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011;20:57-9.

      [3] http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/healthtopics/ebola_marburg_fevers/EVDcasedefinition/Pages/default.aspx

      [4] CDC. State of the Art. Molecular Approaches to Diagnosing and Managing Infectious Diseases: Practicality and Costs https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/7/2/70-0312_article

      [5] Sacchi CT, et al. Sequencing of 16S rRNA gene: a rapid tool for identification of Bacillus anthracis. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002 Oct;8(10):1117-23.

      [6] Stanek G, Fingerle V, Hunfeld KP, Jaulhac B, Kaiser R, Krause A, Kristoferitsch W, O'Connell S, Ornstein K, Strle F, Gray J. Lyme borreliosis: clinical case definitions for diagnosis and management in Europe. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011;17:69-79.

      [7] Steere AC, Strle F, Wormser GP, Hu LT, Branda JA, Hovius JW, Li X, Mead PS. Lyme borreliosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Dec 15;2:16090.

      [8] Marconi RT Garon CF . Development of polymerase chain reaction primer sets for diagnosis of Lyme disease and for species-specific identification of Lyme disease isolates by 16S rRNA signature nucleotide analysis. J Clin Microbiol . 1992;30:2830–2834.

      [9] Cyr TL, et al Improving the specificity of 16S rDNA–based polymerase chain reaction for detecting Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato–causative agents of human Lyme disease. J Appl Microbiol . 2005;98:962–970.

      [10] Santino I, et al. Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato DNA by PCR in serum of patients with clinical symptoms of Lyme borreliosis. FEMS Microbiol Lett . 2008;283:30–35.

      [11] Lee SH, et al. Early Lyme disease with spirochetemia - diagnosed by DNA sequencing. BMC Res Notes. 2010 Nov 1;3:273. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-3-273.

      [12] Lee SH, et al. DNA sequencing diagnosis of off-season spirochetemia with low bacterial density in Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia miyamotoi infections. Int J Mol Sci. 2014 Jun 25;15(7):11364-86.

      [13] Muehlenbachs A, et al. Cardiac Tropism of Borrelia burgdorferi: An Autopsy Study of Sudden Cardiac Death Associated with Lyme Carditis. Am J Pathol. 2016;186:1195-205.

      [14] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7716/

      Conflicts of Interest: Sin Hang Lee, MD is the director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory specialized in developing DNA sequencing-based diagnostic tests.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 04, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The medical profession, including medical schools and hospitals, is now a part of the health care industry, and implementation of editorial policies of medical journals is commonly biased in favor of business interests. PubMed Commons has offered the only, albeit constrained, open forum to air dissenting research and opinions in science-based language. Discontinuation of PubMed Commons will silence any questioning of the industry-sponsored promotional publications indexed in PubMed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2018 Jan 14, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The review by Mohsen and colleagues, titled “Major findings and recent advances in virus-like particle (VLP)-based vaccines”, correctly pointed out that bacterial or viral nucleic acids are probably the real active adjuvants through activation of various toll like receptors (TLRs) in the antigen-presenting cells (APCs) to boost innate immune responses in VLP-based vaccinations, as illustrated in Fig. 5 of the review article. However, in Section “HPV VLP-based vaccines” the authors merely mentioned the facts that Gardasil® is adjuvanted with amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS) and that Cervarix® contains an aluminum hydroxide-based AS04 adjuvant which carries TLR4 agonist 3-0-descyl-4'-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL)- a moiety of the cell wall lipopolysaccharide of Salmonella Minnesota. Since HPV vaccination is now being carried out in large scale, additional discussion on these two VLP-based vaccines is warranted.

      In spite of the fact that VLPs are more immunogenic than the same epitopes displayed repetitively on a flexible polymer, both aforementioned VLP-based HPV vaccines still need special proprietary aluminum salt adjuvants to boost the immune responses of the host to reach sustained high levels of genotype-specific anti-HPV L1 antibodies for protective efficacy. Immunization with HPV L1 VLPs formulated with AAHS elicited a significantly stronger immune response with higher peak antibody titers both at four weeks post vaccination (12.7 to 41.9-fold higher) as well as in the persistent phase at week 52 (4.3 to 26.7-fold higher) than that with HPV L1 VLPs alone. [1] The AS04 formulation Cervarix® elicited an increased frequency (2.2-5.2-fold) of HPV L1 VLP specific memory B cells when compared with the aluminum salt only formulations. [2]

      However, aluminum salts do not activate TLRs. They simply bind and carry the TLR agonists into the APCs. The addition of TLR agonists as adjuvant to a vaccine product is a logical choice to enhance innate immune response needed for effective vaccination. The TLR4 agonist MPL bound to aluminum hydroxide (AS04) is used in licensed vaccines against hepatitis B and human papilloma virus (Cervarix®). The effect of other TLR agonists, including TLR9 agonist CpG ODN which is known to enhance the antibody response in mice to hepatitis B antigen formulated with aluminum hydroxide, on the immune response to aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines has been investigated, but this has not yet led to licensed products. [3]

      To function as an effective adjuvant in vaccination, a TLR agonist molecule either in the form of MPL or in the form of a nucleic acid must bind the cationic aluminum salt loosely or partially so that part of its linear molecule can make contact with the TLR [4]. If a bacterial or viral nucleic acid is used as the TLR9 agonist, the agonist molecule must be rendered resistant to nuclease attack, thus increasing its in vivo half-life [5].

      Although both AS04 and AAHS are commonly labeled as special proprietary “vaccine adjuvants” and both prepared by partial ligand exchange of a phosphate group for a hydroxyl group on aluminum hydroxide, there is a big difference between these two “adjuvants” in that for AS04 the phosphate group is TLR4 agonist MPL while for AAHS the phosphate group is an inorganic anionic phosphate which is immunologically inert. When AAHS is used as an adjuvant in formulation of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (Merck), some of the hydroxyl groups on the AAHS are exchanged for the phosphate groups of the phospholipid-containing hepatitis B surface antigen [6] that the phospholipid moiety of the viral surface antigen actually serves as TLR4 agonist [7]. However, for Gardasil® formulation with AAHS there is no disclosed TLR agonist.

      In compliance with good manufacturing practice for vaccine production, the HPV VLPs have been rendered free of packaged DNA [8, 9]. However, Gardasil® does contain recombinant HPV L1-specific DNA fragments [10, 11], and at least some of these viral DNA fragments bound to the AAHS particles have assumed non-B topological conformations [12], thus rendered resistant to nuclease degradation after being transfected into APCs. These viral DNA fragments bound to AAHS in non-B conformations can serve as potent long-acting TLR9 agonist.

      In theory, the major difference between Cervarix® and Gardasil® in the mechanism of stimulating immune response seems to be that Cervarix® depends on using an MPL bound to cationic aluminum to activate the TLR4 located on the surface of innate immune cells [13] while Gardasil® uses HPV L1 gene DNA fragments also bound to cationic aluminum to activate the TLR9 located in the endosome of the immune cells [13]. In general, TLR4 activation by MPL (AS04) induces cytokine cascades of both Th1 and Th2 type responses with a probably preferential bias toward induction of a Th2 phenotype while TLR9 activation favors induction of pro-inflammatory and Th1 cytokines (for example, IL-6, IL-1, TNFα, IFNγ and IL-12). [14] However, Cervarix® may contain HPV L1 DNA fragments as well, and both the DNA and MPL molecules may attach side-by-side to the same cationic aluminum; the juxtaposition of these two linear molecules may change the shape of the DNA and interfere with conventional PCR amplification for DNA detection. In addition, TLR9 activation may be effected by more than one category of agonists. Therefore, additional research on TLR activation is needed for further improvement of safety and efficacy in HPV vaccination.

      References

      [1] Ruiz W, et al. Kinetics and isotype profile of antibody responses in rhesus macaques induced following vaccination with HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18 L1-virus-like particles formulated with or without Merck aluminum adjuvant. J Immune Based Ther Vaccines. 2005;3:2.

      [2] Giannini SL, et al. Enhanced humoral and memory B cellular immunity using HPV16/18 L1 VLP vaccine formulated with the MPL/aluminium salt combination (AS04) compared to aluminium salt only. Vaccine. 2006;24:5937-49.

      [3] Hogenesch H. Mechanism of immunopotentiation and safety of aluminum adjuvants. Front Immunol. 2013;3:406.

      [4] Tagliabue A, Rappuoli R. Vaccine adjuvants: the dream becomes real. Hum Vaccin. 2008;4:347-9.

      [5] Aebig JA, et al. Formulation of vaccines containing CpG oligonucleotides and alum. J Immunol Methods. 2007;323:139-46.

      [6] Egan PM, et al. Relationship between tightness of binding and immunogenicity in an aluminum-containing adjuvant-adsorbed hepatitis B vaccine. Vaccine. 2009;27:3175-80.

      [7] Wong-Baeza C, et al. Nonbilayer Phospholipid Arrangements Are Toll-Like Receptor-2/6 and TLR-4 Agonists and Trigger Inflammation in a Mouse Model Resembling Human Lupus. J Immunol Res. 2015;2015:369462.

      [8] Frazer IH. Eradicating HPV-Associated Cancer Through Immunization: A Glass Half Full…. Viral Immunol. 2018 Jan 3. doi: 10.1089/vim.2017.0119.

      [9] Mach H, et al. Disassembly and reassembly of yeast-derived recombinant human papillomavirus virus-like particles (HPV VLPs). J Pharm Sci. 2006 Oct;95(10):2195-206.

      [10] Lee SH. Detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) L1 gene DNA possibly bound to particulate aluminum adjuvant in the HPV vaccine Gardasil. J Inorg Biochem. 2012;117:85-92.

      [11] FDA Information on Gardasil – Presence of DNA Fragments Expected, No Safety Risk. http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm276859.htm

      [12] Lee SH. Melting profiles may affect detection of residual HPV L1 gene DNA fragments in Gardasil®. Curr Med Chem. 2014;21:932-40.

      [13] O'Neill LA, et al. The history of Toll-like receptors - redefining innate immunity. Nat Rev Immunol. 2013;13:453-60.

      [14] Dowling JK, Mansell A. Toll-like receptors: the swiss army knife of immunity and vaccine development. Clin Transl Immunology. 2016;5(5):e85.

      Conflicts of Interest: Sin Hang Lee, MD is the director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory specialized in developing DNA sequencing-based diagnostic tests.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2018 Jan 13, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 18, Clive Bates commented:

      The paper provides a very unsatisfactory contribution to the literature on e-cigarettes and harm reduction, from which no useful policy conclusions can be drawn.

      CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette use, which is common in adults with or at risk for COPD, was associated with worse pulmonary-related health outcomes, but not with cessation of smoking conventional cigarettes. ​

      But it turns out that e-cigarette use was associated with more intensive smoking in the past.

      E-cigarette users had a heavier conventional cigarette smoking history and worse respiratory health, were less likely to reduce or quit conventional cigarette smoking, had higher nicotine dependence, and were more likely to report chronic bronchitis and exacerbations.

      This likely explains the difference in respiratory health and why more heavily dependent users may find it harder to quit. In other words, it is nothing to do with e-cigarettes, the use of which is probably just a marker of more intensive smoking, higher dependency and greater difficulty quitting - not caused by e-cigarette use. It is the smoking history that matters.

      From this the authors add to their conclusion:

      Although this was an observational study, we find no evidence supporting the use of e-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among current smokers with or at risk for COPD.

      ​It is literally true that they "find no evidence...", but that is because this study is completely ill-suited to drawing any policy conclusions about e-cigarettes and COPD. Despite hinting at the limitations of cross-sectional data, the authors draw a negative-sounding conclusion without addressing the key question of how respiratory health changes for a given smoker who uses e-cigarettes to quit or cut down once they are ill from smoking or as a way of preventing COPD.

      For respiratory physicians wondering what to do in the interest of their patients, Polosa R, 2016 Evidence for harm reduction in COPD smokers who switch to electronic cigarettes might be more useful.

      A whole new level of over-interpretation is achieved in the press statements that accompany this paper.

      "The data further suggest that there's no clear benefit of e-cigarettes as a harm-reduction strategy in this population of smokers with or at-risk for COPD."

      This effortlessly moves from a no-evidence-of-effect (the paper) to evidence-of-no-effect (the press statement). I'm sure the authors will be embarrassed by that.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 04, Arnaud Chiolero MD PhD commented:

      I fear that we will not survive. But this is not new - evidence has never matched public health and clinical practice.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 13, Francesco Brigo commented:

      Very nice study. Congratulations! This has reminded me about the recent exhumation of the body of Salvador Dalì. According to forensic experts, his moustache was still inact, pointing to 10-past-10, just as he wanted. Francesco Brigo, University of Verona, Italy


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 02, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      VIRAL REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION WITHIN A COMMON HOST CELL

      This otherwise admirable article (Hunter P, 2017) begins with the curious assertion that, "since they depend on their host for replication," then viruses cannot "be categorized as species on the basis of reproductive isolation." The latter prevents recombination between organisms and so forms the most generally accepted definition of species. Virus species whose members share a common host cell, and depend on that cell for their replication, are still able to retain their species individuality. Their members do not mutually destroy each other by recombinational blending of their genomes. They are reproductively isolated from each other.

      When we compare two viral species that have a common host cell, with two viral species that, even within a common host, do not share a common cell, we would expect to observe a fundamental difference related to their reproductive isolation mechanisms. If that difference is found to apply to other viral pairs that occupy a common host cell, then a fundamental isolation mechanism has been identified.

      Such a difference was first related to the base compositions of insect viruses (1), a then to the base compositions of herpes viruses (2). A more extreme example arose from studies of retroviruses that share a T-lymphocyte host. The AIDS virus (HIV1) and human T cell leukaemia virus (HTLV1), can be assumed to have evolved from a common ancestor. Differentiation of members of that ancestral species within a common host cell into two independent populations would have required some mechanism to prevent their blending. Thus, we see today a wide divergence in base compositions. HIV1 is one of the highest AT-rich species know. HTLV1 is one of the highest GC-rich species known (3). There is high differentiation of chromosomal nucleic acids.

      In these viruses there has been no opportunity for other reproductive isolation mechanisms to supersede chromosomal mechanisms. Diffusible cytoplasmic products make the subsequent evolution of genic incompatibilities less likely, and being in a common host cell there is no equivalent of prezygotic isolation as conventionally understood (4).

      1. Wyatt GR (1952) The nucleic acids of some insect viruses. J Gen Physiol 36:201-205. WYATT GR, 1952
      2. Schachtel GA et al. (1991) Evidence for selective evolution of codon usage in conserved amino acid segments of human alphaherpesvirus proteins. J Mol Evol 33:483-494. Schachtel GA, 1991
      3. Bronson EC, Anderson JN (1994) Nucleotide composition as a driving force in the evolution of retroviruses. J Mol Evol 38:506-532. Bronson EC, 1994
      4. Forsdyke DR (1996) Different biological species broadcast their DNAs at different (G+C)% wavelengths. J Theoret Biol 178:405-417. Forsdyke DR, 1996% "wavelengths".")


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 27, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      "CLOSE TO SELF" AND "NEAR SELF"

      A major conclusion of this elegant modeling study is that "TCR selection against self-peptides has a minimal influence on the recognition of peptides which are 'close' to self." Thus, "TCR negative selection by host peptides has only a weak suppressive effect on detecting peptides which closely resemble self." This agrees with a somewhat less elegant modeling study that invoked lymphocyte clones selected for anti-"near-self" immune reactivity. These would normally have escaped negative selection (i.e. would have been positively selected; 1). The "near-self" viewpoint contrasted with the then prevailing "altered self" viewpoint (2). However, whereas George et al. (2017) regard their study as "empirical," the earlier study (1) arose from consideration of alloreactive phenomena and recognized implications for cancer immunotherapy in keeping with an "overall objective of optimizing CRL therapy" (3, 4). Full historical reviews are available (5, 6).

      1. 1.Forsdyke DR (1975) Further implications of a theory of immunity. J Theor Biol 52: l87-l98.Forsdyke DR, 1975

      2. 2.Forsdyke DR (2005) "Altered-self" or "near-self" in the positive selection of lymphocyte repertoires? Immunol Lett 100: 103-106.Forsdyke DR, 2005

      3. 3.Forsdyke (1977) Grant application

      4. 4.Forsdyke DR (1999) Heat shock proteins as mediators of aggregation-induced "danger" signals: implications of the slow evolutionary fine-tuning of sequences for the antigenicity of cancer cel1s. Cell Stress Chaperone 4: 205-210.Forsdyke DR, 1999

      5. 5.Forsdyke DR (2012) Immunology (1955-1975): The natural selection theory, the two signal hypothesis and positive repertoire selection. J Hist Biol 45: 139-161.Forsdyke DR, 2012

      6. 6.Forsdyke DR (2015) Lymphocyte repertoire selection and intracellular self/not-self discrimination: historical overview. Immun Cell Biol 93: 297-304.Forsdyke DR, 2015


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 13, Haibao Tang commented:

      No major flaws in "Identification of individuals by trait prediction using whole-genome sequencing data"

      For a complete discussion, please also read authors' response to Erlich's critique:

      http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/11/187542

      Abstract

      In a recently published PNAS article, we studied the identifiability of genomic samples using machine learning methods [Lippert et al., 2017]. In a response, Erlich [2017] argued that our work contained major flaws. The main technical critique of Erlich [2017] builds on a simulation experiment that shows that our proposed algorithm, which uses only a genomic sample for identification, performed no better than a strategy that uses demographic variables. Below, we show why this comparison is misleading and provide a detailed discussion of the key critical points in our analysis that have been brought up in Erlich [2017] and in the media. We also want to point out that it is not only faces that may be derived from DNA, but a wide range of phenotypes and demographic variables. In this light, the main contribution of Lippert et al. [2017] is an algorithm that identifies genomes of individuals by combining DNA-based predictive models for multiple traits.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 08, Yaniv Erlich commented:

      Major flaws in "Identification of individuals by trait prediction using whole-genome"

      Check the following bioRxiv link for a full explanation on the methodological problems in this paper: http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/06/185330

      Abstract

      Genetic privacy is an area of active research. While it is important to identify new risks, it is equally crucial to supply policymakers with accurate information based on scientific evidence. Recently, Lippert et al. (PNAS, 2017) investigated the status of genetic privacy using trait-predictions from whole genome sequencing. The authors sequenced a cohort of about 1000 individuals and collected a range of demographic, visible, and digital traits such as age, sex, height, face morphology, and a voice signature. They attempted to use the genetic features in order to predict those traits and re-identify the individuals from small pool using the trait predictions. Here, I report major flaws in the Lippert et al. manuscript. In short, the authors' technique performs similarly to a simple baseline procedure, does not utilize the power of whole genome markers, uses technically wrong metrics, and finally does not really identify anyone.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 19, Helmi BEN SAAD commented:

      The exact names of authors are: Ben Khelifa M, Ben Salem H, Sfaxi R, Chatti S, Rouatbi S, Ben Saad H"


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 22, Ryan Jajosky commented:

      After asking the FDA for clarification, I was directed to the FDA's Blood Products Advisory Committee Transcript... which states the following "Babesia microti is among the most frequently transfusion transmitted infections reported to FDA, with associated fatalities, for which no donor testing is available."

      https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/BloodVaccinesandOtherBiologics/BloodProductsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM449523.pdf

      The FDA has labelled the page number 9 (which corresponds to digital page number 11).

      So, this statement may have been misinterpreted to mean that "Babesia is the most common transfusion transmitted infection in the United States".


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 09, Clive Bates commented:

      The authors of the original study Jensen RP, 2015 should now correct or retract their findings. The key weakness in their work was an attention-grabbing calculation of formaldehyde-related excess cancer risk. It was this that gained the authors world wide media coverage.

      The problem for the authors is that cancer is a human condition and their calculation is based exposures measured by a lab machine in conditions that no humans would be able to tolerate.

      It is thus a wholly flawed and misleading paper. Yet it has been cited 141 times as of - 9 Sept 2017, and continues to mislead and contaminate the literature with its baseless assertions about formaldehyde exposure and cancer risk.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 27, Thomas Jové commented:

      I would like to point out that the right citation for the localisation of the Pc promoter from the IntIA Vibrio cholerae integron is PMID24614503 (Krin et al., 2014) and not PMID22287520 (Baharoglu et al., 2012) as stated in the discussion section of our paper. Our apologies for the inconvenience.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 25, Franz Schelling commented:

      What appears rather strange is, besides, this fact: The massive changes found to affect the MS lesions' central veins themselves as well as their perivascular spaces are hardly anywhere taken into account


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 25, Franz Schelling commented:

      It is a pity this study offers no explanation for the following: (a) the prominent involvement of the inner cerebral veins (Zeng ea 2013); (b) the abrupt respectively gradual destruction of large subependymal collecting veins (Adams 1989); (c) the extension of these changes on certain segments of mainly the cerebral hemispheres' periventricular veins, first shown by Charcot in 1866, explicitly pointed out by Bruce in 1911, traced in 3D reconstructions by Putnam Adler in 1937 and the most thoroughly and comprehensively by Fog in 1964/5; (d) the absence of any evidence regarding a vein-dependent development of the lesions affecting the spinal cord in MS; and, above all, (e) the lesion dynamics revealed at http://www.msdiscovery.org/news/news_synthesis/322-more-meets-eye. References on request.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Sep 18, David Hubbard commented:

      Reposted from ResearchGate A new model of MS pathogenesis is reviewed in which the primary mechanism is not immunopathology but instead blood-brain barrier disruption and hypoperfusion: “The focus on the peripheral immune system alone may be limiting our understanding of the disease and the success of developing therapies.” The authors note that all current immunomodulatory therapies act on downstream immune-mediated pathology and provide no treatment for progressive disease or cure. A review of research demonstrates that BBB disruption is present at the earliest stages of disease, preceding symptoms, enhancing lesions, or other MRI changes. Global hypoperfusion is present before any grey matter volume loss and is out of proportion to reduced metabolic demand associated with axonal loss. They propose that oxidative stress secondary to chronic hypoxia causes oligodendrocyte degeneration and selective myelin loss which then leads to immune cell infiltration secondarily.

      Finally, the diagnosis and treatment of MS shifts from suppressing T-cells and to perfusing oligodendrocytes.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2017 Sep 14, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      Giampiero Avruscio MD and Alessandro Rasman

      We read with interest the paper from Spencer et al. titled "Vascular pathology in multiple sclerosis: reframing pathogenesis around the blood-brain barrier" (1). Nice review but no mention of pressure, flow, gradient, G-lymphatics. And we find it really curious that the authors are now acting as though it's a surprise there is a vascular pathogenesis in MS. We know the blood brain barrier breaksdown occurs before demyelination. There’s a paper on this from 1990 (2). This ain't new.

      References: 1. Spencer, Jonathan I., Jack S. Bell, and Gabriele C. DeLuca. "Vascular pathology in multiple sclerosis: reframing pathogenesis around the blood-brain barrier." J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry (2017): jnnp-2017. 2. Kermode, A. G., et al. "Breakdown of the blood-brain barrier precedes symptoms and other MRI signs of new lesions in multiple sclerosis: pathogenetic and clinical implications." Brain 113.5 (1990): 1477-1489.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 08, Harald HHW Schmidt commented:

      This is a poorly reviewed paper. I cannot detect any evidence that this peptide is specific for sGC nor that it would act via sGC-alpha1 to induce apoptosis.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 01, Daniel Corcos commented:

      Maybe women who did not find believable the statements about overdiagnosis showed good judgement. Overdiagnosis only accounts for a small part of excess cancers observed after mammography screening.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 30, Alessandro Rasman commented:

      Very interesting study. It is important now to test it on humans because there are doubts about the utility of the EAE model in the MS (1). References: 1. Behan, Peter O., and Abhijit Chaudhuri. "EAE is not a useful model for demyelinating disease." Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders 3.5 (2014): 565-574.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 20, christian lino cardenas commented:

      Hdac9 gene encode different isoforms. it would be interesting to know which isoform miR-182 is targeting and whether such interaction occurs in humans.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 15, Anna Selva commented:

      Thank you. We are glad this strategy have been added to ISSG Search Filters Resource. It will help its diffusion to potential users.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 05, Kath Wright commented:

      I agree this is a useful addition to the literature. It's been added to the issg Search Filter Resource at https://sites.google.com/a/york.ac.uk/issg-search-filters-resource/filters-to-identify-studies-of-public-views-and-patient-issues


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Sep 15, Anna Selva commented:

      Thank you. The copy-paste version is available under request. Please, contact the corresponding author and we will provide it to you.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    4. On 2017 Sep 03, Hilda Bastian commented:

      This is a useful addition on an important topic, and is a good resource for other similar search strategies. Given it is such a long search strategy, it would be useful if the authors could provide a cut and paste version. Small point: the KiMS search strategy cited with reference number 27 in the article is actually at reference number 28 (Wessels M, 2016).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 03, Honglin Jia commented:

      A recent report about RON4 in T.gondii should be refered. Wang et al., The moving junction protein RON4, although not critical, facilitates host cell invasion and stabilizes MJ members.Parasitology.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 06, Susan Altfeld commented:

      We thank Dr. Mages for his interest in our work; however, we do not agree with his assessment. While it would have been more precise to talk about “non-Hispanic Black mothers” and “Hispanic mothers”, the authors of the paper we were citing (Colson, Willinger, Rybin et al., 2013) themselves refer to “non-Hispanic Black infants” and “Hispanic infants” in their study (most likely adhering to the NCHS standard of attributing mother’s race-ethnicity to the infant.) We are aware of the difference between race and ethnicity, but are not sure what point Mages was trying to make, as combining the two in demographic categories (e.g. “non-Hispanic black”) is standard practice in reporting epidemiological data (hence the common use of the term “race/ethnicity”.) The focus of our commentary was not racial/ethnic differences in SUID rates, but on the need for a more nuanced, harm reduction approach to safe sleep messaging. Many caregivers, of diverse backgrounds, have failed to adhere to abstinence messages regarding infant sleep and new approaches are needed to impact caregiver knowledge and behavior.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 01, David Mage commented:

      Altfeld et al., PMID: 28838726, made an excellent study of the recent efforts to reduce sleep-related infant deaths in the U.S. However, they made both an explicit error and an implicit error that needs to be called to the readers’ attention:

      Explicit Error: On page 2, they refer to “mothers of non-Hispanic Black infants” and “mothers of Hispanic infants.” [NB: Hispanic is an ethnicity and not a race] Apparently, the authors did not read carefully their references [1, 2, 21] and the Technical Notes cited therein. The CDC and NCHS both explicitly state that their cited racial data are either the mother’s self-identified race if monoracial, or “To provide uniformity and comparability of these data [to census data, per OMB requirement], multiple race [of mother] is imputed to a single race.” (see NCHS Technical Notes). The authors of reference 21 conducted an evening at-the-door survey of parents of recently born infants, and “Participants were asked: ‘Which of the following best describes [your, or] the mother's race or ethnic background?’ They were then read a list but also given the option to name one that was not listed.” The mother answered 84% of the time and 16% of the time another adult person responded for her;

      Implicit Error: The authors seem to have forgotten that the father of an infant often plays a role in the determination of the race of the infant. I used the word “often” instead of always because “Tis a wise child that knows its own father.” [Puddn’head Wilson, Mark Twain] {Old Burlesque joke: Enter little redhaired boy. Clown: What lovely red hair you have. Do mommy and daddy have red hair too? Little Boy: No --- But we do have a milkman with red hair. (audience laughs) Exit boy.} Therefore, implicitly, the self-identified race of the mother is the same race as the infant if, and only if, the mother is monoracial, and the father (either known or unknown) is the identical race as the mother.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 03, Donald Forsdyke commented:

      REDESIGNATING SELF AS NOT-SELF MARKERS

      A cell's altruistic service to the population of cells that comprise its host organism may be compromised by a foreign pathogen or by a mutated driver cancer gene (both deemed "non-self"). Such intracellular compromising agents can first be addressed by internal sensing and auto-destructive mechanisms. Should one of these fail, then external sensing and destructive mechanisms, involving reactions with specific predatory T cells, may come into play. A compromised cell has the option of displaying peptides as pMHC complexes to see if they are recognized by members of T cell populations that, following thymic surveillance and deletion of nascent strongly self-reacting T cells, are programed to eliminate cells displaying non-self markers.

      While such markers may arise from foreign proteins or mutated self proteins, Mishto and Liepe note that the scope of markers ("the antigenic landscape") can be greatly increased by redesignating potential self markers (unspliced peptides in pMHC complexes) as non-self (1). This creation of foreign from self is achieved by splicing and trimming non-contiguous peptides to create novel peptides that would not have passed thymic filters and so would be seen as non-self. Two corollaries of this are that such peptide splicing must not occur in the thymus and that, to militate against autoimmunity, extra-thymic specific splicing of separate protein segments would not occur randomly in uncompromised cells.

      Thus, some elements of an internal sensing mechanism within a compromised cell would be needed to foster an extension of the antigenic landscape. The growing evidence for such a mechanism in the antigen presentation pathway (intracellular self/non-self discrimination) is presented elsewhere (2). I agree that "the unexpectedly large frequency and amount of … spliced peptides may … have profound implications for the concept of self/nonself peptide presentation" (3).

      1.Mishto M, Liepe J. (2017) Post-translational peptide splicing and T cell responses. Trends in Immunology 38:904-915 Mishto M, 2017

      2.Forsdyke DR (2015) Lymphocyte repertoire selection and intracellular self/not-self discrimination: historical overview. Immunology and Cell Biology 93:297-304. Forsdyke DR, 2015

      3.Liepe J et al. (2016) A large fraction of HLA class I ligands are proteasome-generated spliced peptides. Science 354:354-358.Liepe J, 2016


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 28, Daniel Weiss commented:

      Karter et. al describe a tool to predict the risk of hypoglycemia in persons with Type 2 Diabetes. This tool confirms obvious, well-established clinical observations: sulfonylureas and insulin are associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia. Three points are worth clarifying.

      First, this tool was developed in the Kaiser Permanente of Northern California health care system where practitioners have a very limited choice of agents for Type 2 Diabetes. In that system and the Veterans Health Administration, the usage of drugs that do not tend to cause hypoglycemia is restricted due to cost. Yet, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have been available since 2005 and the first sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor was approved in 2013. Although less effective, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors have been around since 2007. All these drug classes cost more than sulfonylureas but none put patients at risk for hypoglycemia.

      In large part, because of that risk of hypoglycemia, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists algorithm (1) for pharmacotherapy of Type 2 Diabetes judges sulfonylureas as the worst option. Indeed, the annual rate of hypoglycemia was lowest in the Group Health Cooperative patients where sulfonylureas were used less frequently.

      Second, the authors fail to account for the type of insulin prescribed. They lump all insulins together. And they discuss skipping meals as a cause of hypoglycemia. All insulins are not the same. For example, NPH insulin is associated with a greater risk of hypoglycemia than is insulin glargine in head to head trials (2). And the pharmacokinetics of NPH insulin are such that insulin levels often peak when the patient is not eating. Well-designed insulin regimens allow patients to skip meals with no problem.

      Third, in their lengthy discussion on steps to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia, the authors fail to even mention choosing effective agents that do not cause hypoglycemia such as GLP-1 receptor agonists or SGLT-2 inhibitors. And some of these newer agents have now been demonstrated to reduce cardiovascular events and mortality.

      The authors focus on population approaches, not the best care for the individual patient in the exam room.

      Conflict of Interest Disclosures: This commenter receives clinical research funding and speaker honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies that market medication for diabetes.

      1. Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, et al. Consensus Statement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology on the Comprehensive Type 2 Diabetes Management Algorithm - 2017 Executive Summary. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(2):207-238.
      2. Riddle MC, Rosenstock J, Gerich J, Insulin Glargine Study I. The treat-to-target trial: randomized addition of glargine or human NPH insulin to oral therapy of type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(11):3080-3086.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 02, David Keller commented:

      More evidence that light-to-moderate ethanol consumption reduces all-cause mortality, primarily by reductions in cardiovascular events. Now, we need randomized controlled trials of ethanol

      This large study paid careful attention to the drinking history and pattern of ethanol consumption of its subjects, eliminating many of the objections raised to prior studies which have reached the same conclusions. I, for one, am as convinced as can be, given the observational nature of all such studies, that light-to-moderate consumption of ethanol is probably beneficial, especially in persons at higher than average risk of cardiovascular (CV) events. The time has come to conduct interventional trials, with subjects randomized to receive capsules of ethanol at bedtime or placebo, to compare outcomes when ethanol is prescribed to patients with evidence of atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASVD), or at high risk thereof. If these most-likely-to-benefit patients do benefit, the next trial could expand to include subjects at average CV risk. Ethanol remains the agent most likely to benefit those with ASVD which cannot be prescribed, because it has never been studied as a medicine, rather than an addiction.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 29, Marcus de Jong commented:

      With great interest, but also with significant apprehension, we read the article by Yamanaka et al. recently published on-line ahead of print in Neurosurgical Review, entitled "Trilateral retinoblastoma: A systematic review of 211 cases."

      We have had a long-time interest in retinoblastoma, including trilateral retinoblastoma, and we became worried about the fact that the authors allegedly have included 211 patients with trilateral retinoblastoma in their statistical analysis. We have reason to believe that this number, and consequently, the presented results may not be correct. In 2014, we published a systematic review and meta-analysis on trilateral retinoblastoma in Lancet Oncology, based on strict adherence to the PRISMA Statement (de Jong et al. [1]). We also contacted authors to resolve any equivocal issues. In particular, we meticulously matched patients between reports to prevent including any patients twice in our analysis. Many patients with trilateral retinoblastoma appear in the literature two or more times over the years; in the extreme case, one patient features in five different reports over 12 years. Resolving duplications and consolidating the sequential reports by each patient, we ended up with 174 unique individuals with trilateral retinoblastoma (see the attached table from the online supplement of our article).

      Naturally, a number of trilateral retinoblastoma cases included in Yamanaka et al.'s paper have been published after acceptance of our paper. These are Andrade et al. [2] with 1 case, De Ioris et al. [3] with 2 new cases, and Pham et al. [4] with 3 cases, amounting to a total difference of 6 unique patients.

      However, we included several articles that Yamanaka et al. have not ascertained during their research: De Jong et al. [5], Duncan et al. [6], Dunst et al. [7], Gururangan et al. [8], Jin et al. [9], Lim et al. [10], Mauger et al. [11], Onadim et al. [12], Popovic et al. [13], White et al. [14], and Zimmerman et al. [15]. These amount to a total of 18 unique cases.

      We became very concerned after noting that, correcting for new cases and articles not included by Yamanaka et al., the difference in the number of patients between the two articles is no less than 49 (our 174 - 18 not included by Yamanaka et al. = 156 in De Jong et al. [1] versus their 211 - 6 newly reported = 205 in Yamanaka et al. [16]). Because Yamanaka et al. have not provided a patient-by-patient table of their cases unlike we did, we are limited to this numerical comparison and cannot verify case by case their unique cases.

      In summary, we have reason to believe that Yamanaka et al. have not accounted for the fact that trilateral retinoblastoma patients have often been published in more than one paper. Although the results of the meta-analysis by Yamanaka et al., in general, show results that appear largely similar to those that what we published, the unexplained and large difference in the number of patients suggests to us that most, if not all, percentages and p-values from the meta-analysis by Yamanaka et al. do not reflect reality. There is also no way of knowing whether a particular statistic is correct or not.

      To solve this issue, we ask Yamanaka et al. to clarify this crucial aspect of their meta-analysis, ideally by providing a patient-by-patient list of the 211 cases to verify their uniqueness to be attached to their paper. Hopefully the authors can provide a valid explanation that completely resolves our concerns. Otherwise, we are afraid that the statistical results of this paper will be misleading and cannot be trusted, and then perhaps the paper in the present form should be retracted in order to correct the literature and to avoid wrong interpretations in clinical practice of managing children with trilateral retinoblastoma.

      Marcus de Jong,

      on behalf of the authors of de Jong et al. [1]

      References

      1.de Jong MC, Kors WA, de Graaf P, et al (2014) Trilateral retinoblastoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 15:1157–1167. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70336-5

      2.Andrade GC de, Pinto NP de C, Motono M, et al (2015) Trilateral retinoblastoma with unilateral eye involvement. Rev Assoc Med Bras 61:308–10. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.61.04.308

      3.De Ioris MA, Valente P, Randisi F, et al (2014) Baseline central nervous system magnetic resonance imaging in early detection of trilateral retinoblastoma: pitfalls in the diagnosis of pineal gland lesions. Anticancer Res 34:7449–54.

      4.Pham TTH, Siebert E, Asbach P, et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging based morphologic evaluation of the pineal gland for suspected pineoblastoma in retinoblastoma patients and age-matched controls. J Neurol Sci 359:185–192. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2015.10.046

      5.de Jong MC, Moll AC, Göricke S, et al (2016) From a Suspicious Cystic Pineal Gland to Pineoblastoma in a Patient with Familial Unilateral Retinoblastoma. Ophthalmic Genet 37:116–8. doi: 10.3109/13816810.2014.929717

      6.Duncan JL, Scott IU, Murray TG, et al (2001) Routine neuroimaging in retinoblastoma for the detection of intracranial tumors. Arch Ophthalmol 119:450–2. 7.Dunst J, Fellner E, Erhardt J (1990) Trilaterales Retinoblastom mit spinalen Metastasen. Rofo 153:343–4. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1033391

      8.Gururangan S, McLaughlin C, Quinn J, et al (2003) High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell rescue in children and adults with newly diagnosed pineoblastomas. J Clin Oncol 21:2187–91. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.10.096

      9.Jin J, Tang H-F, Zhou Y-B (2006) Trilateral retinoblastoma: a case report. World J Pediatr 2:151–153.

      10.Lim FPM, Soh SY, Iyer JV, et al (2013) Clinical profile, management, and outcome of retinoblastoma in Singapore. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 50:106–12.

      11.Mauger TF, Makley TA, Davidorf FH, Rogers GL (1992) Retinoblastoma, microphthalmia, coloboma, and neuroepithelioma of the pineal body. Ann Ophthalmol 24:290–4.

      12.Onadim Z, Woolford AJ, Kingston JE, Hungerford JL (1997) The RB1 gene mutation in a child with ectopic intracranial retinoblastoma. Br J Cancer 76:1405–9.

      13.Popovic MB, Balmer A, Maeder P, et al (2006) Benign pineal cysts in children with bilateral retinoblastoma: a new variant of trilateral retinoblastoma? Pediatr Blood Cancer 46:755–61.

      14.White L, Johnston H, Jones R, et al (1993) Postoperative chemotherapy without radiation in young children with malignant non-astrocytic brain tumours. A report from the Australia and New Zealand Childhood Cancer Study Group (ANZCCSG). Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 32:403–6.

      15.Zimmerman L (1985) Trilateral retinoblastoma. In: Blodi F (ed) Retinoblastoma. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 185–210

      16.Yamanaka R, Hayano A, Takashima Y (2017) Trilateral retinoblastoma: A systematic review of 211 cases. Neurosurg Rev. doi: 10.1007/s10143-017-0890-4

      Also posted here: https://pubpeer.com/publications/50D5D3EFEA81DCD2421841D84FDA8D#


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Feb 04, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      The medical profession, including medical schools and hospitals, is now a part of the health care industry, and implementation of editorial policies of medical journals is commonly biased in favor of business interests. PubMed Commons has offered the only, albeit constrained, open forum to air dissenting research and opinions in science-based language. Discontinuation of PubMed Commons will silence any questioning of the industry-sponsored promotional publications indexed in PubMed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Aug 20, Sin Hang Lee commented:

      Since the lead author and several co-authors of this report are officers of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the CDC should clarify if this metabolomics-driven technology is now officially recommended for clinical laboratory tests for the diagnosis of emerging infectious diseases in general, or it is created in competition against the well-established 16S rRNA sequence analysis in bacterial infections [1,2] which should be used for molecular diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. To rely on finding metabolic biosignature consisting of molecular features in patient body fluids to diagnose or to distinguish between emerging infectious diseases is an unproven technology and may have untoward consequences. Would these authors propose using metabolic biosignature in the blood of patients to diagnose Ebola or to distinguish between Ebola and malaria? Of course not!

      The authors cited two articles published by other investigators [3,4] to support their novel approach. However, in one of these articles [3] metabolomics were reported to be used as a tool in precision medicine for disease risk assessment and customized drug therapy in clinics. In the other [4], metabolomics were used as a tool to identify the chemical differences that contribute to health and disease, such as chronic fatigue syndrome. Neither concerned diagnosis of or distinguishing between infectious diseases.

      The authors claimed to have “previously demonstrated that metabolic profiling of sera provided a high level of accuracy in differentiating early Lyme disease patients from healthy individuals …” [5]. However, in the latter cited article the same lead author [5] stated that it was only a study of “proof-of-concept for a novel diagnostic approach” and that “the early LD biosignature correctly diagnosed 77%–95% of 2-tier negative early LD patients”. That means there was an up to 23% failure in detecting early Lyme disease. Even this statistical model is highly questionable since the very case definition of early Lyme disease is still open to question. According to the CDC's answer to the question: “Is PCR useful for the diagnosis of Lyme disease? In general, the answer is no.” [6].

      The claim to have discovered an objective, diagnostically useful “metabolic biosignature” of Lyme disease or STARI which are both emerging infectious diseases, by analysis of a set of metabolites in tissue fluids of the patients must be supported by undisputed evidence with proven scientific principles. The authors’ novel approach in fact has deviated from the classic teachings of diagnostic microbiology. The findings of metabolic differences between patients with Lyme disease and patients with STARI do not automatically yield a test that can be used to diagnose or to distinguish between Lyme disease and STARI.

      Conflicts of Interest: Sin Hang Lee, MD is the director of Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory specialized in developing DNA sequencing-based diagnostic tests. References: [1] https://www.cdc.gov/labtraining/docs/588-100_103-17_16S_rRNA_Sequence_Based_Bacterial_Identification.pdf [2] https://www.cdc.gov/microbenet/about.html [3] Guo L, Milburn MV, Ryals JA, et al. Plasma metabolomic profiles enhance precision medicine for volunteers of normal health. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Sep 1;112(35):E4901-10. [4] Naviaux RK, Naviaux JC, Li K, et al. Metabolic features of chronic fatigue syndrome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Sep 13;113(37):E5472-80. [5] Molins CR, Ashton LV, Wormser GP, et al. Development of a metabolic biosignature for detection of early Lyme disease. Clin Infect Dis. 2015 Jun 15;60(12):1767-75. [6] Christina A. Nelson, MD, MPH, Medical Officer in the Bacterial Diseases Branch of CDC's Division of Vector-Borne Disease. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/764501?src=par_cdc_stm_mscpedt&faf=1 Last accessed August 19, 2017.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 10, Susanne Bejerot commented:

      Intriguingly we published a parallel study with the same methodology using the equipment provided by the company Sensodetect Inc, but we found that the method had a very low ability to identify patients with psychotic disorders, adhd and autism, as well as identifying the healthy controls in a blinded study, see Manouilenko I, Humble MB, Georgieva J, Bejerot S. Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials for diagnosing Autism Spectrum Disorder, ADHD and Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders in adults. A blinded study. Psychiatry Res. 2017 Jul 6;257:21-26. Manouilenko I, 2017. Consequently, I contacted the first author of the Acta Neuropsychiatrica paper, Eva Juselius Baghdassarian, to discuss our conflicting findings. Her explanation was their use of an old stationary auditory brainstem response apparatus, whereas we used the company’s mobile modern machine. Our machine was transported back and fourth between Stockholm and the south of Sweden in a large cabin bag. This is of course highly problematic, as the company currently markets the method that we used. I suggest that the interested reader carefully reads the method section of both papers.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2018 Jan 22, Nicholas Lawson commented:

      Authors' claims are not supported by their results. Authors do not acknowledge some of the most common criticisms of the studies in their review:

      (1) Physician health program (PHP) data may be suspect because PHPs benefit from presenting a rosy picture of their effectiveness.

      (2) Self-reports from those being evaluated by PHPs, who have much to lose from responding to surveys in ways that criticize these programs, may not be reliable.

      (3) There are considerable reasons to doubt that "programme completion," "return to practice," and "no relapse/recurrence" reflect treatment efficacy. Unwarranted referrals may also result in coerced treatment for physicians who do not have a substance use disorder or problematic performance.

      (4) There are no comparisons to those who were not referred for PHP treatment.

      Other concerns related to PHP treatment are addressed in "Do state physician health programs encourage referrals that violate the Americans with Disabilities Act?"

      https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1WL2XaR~~IVy0


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 26, Giorgio Cattoretti commented:

      The method published is based on blocking the detection of previously deposited antibodies by a second staining round via an undisclosed amount of monomeric Fab fragments of secondary antibodies. “No cross-reactivity was observed between secondary Abs targeting primary Abs from the same species or with the same isotype. The absence of cross-reactivity was dependent on incubation with a blocking buffer before each restaining step (fig. S1) “ [quoted from the paper]. But on page 4, quoted again, ”tissue section was repeatedly stained, destained, and restained with the same anti-CD3 Ab" (legend to Fig. S5), in order to demonstrate "the absence of steric hindrance ….. upon successful consecutive cycles of staining/bleaching using the same marker (fig. S5)." If the block was applied after each staining round in both cases, no staining at all should be the expected result, as the Authors have shown in Fig. S1. If instead no block was applied, resulting in crossreactions between previous staining layers and the successive, any claim regarding steric hindrance has a weak scientific basis at best. In either scenario, the contradiction question the validity of the method, unless explained. In addition, a “dehydration” step in xylene (Fig. 1) most likely entails a reduction of tissue antigenicity, thus reproducibility, as we published (PMID: 26487185) six months before this paper was submitted and afterwards (PMID: 28692376 ): this topic is not sufficiently addressed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Dec 07, HIRENDRA BANERJEE commented:

      None


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Dec 04, Raphael Levy commented:

      This article was referenced (and his first author interviewed) in support of the SmartFlare technology (Merck) in a Chemistry World piece entitled Scrutiny of SmartFlares raises questions over RNA probes. It is therefore ironic that ~40% of its introduction is identical text to this blog post (which is highly critical of the SmartFlares).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 14, Heinrich Janzing commented:

      Unfortunately there are some errors in this abstract. The p-values belong to the evaluation of heterogeneity: so correct is: "This number was significantly lower in patients who received daily subcutaneous injections of LMWH during immobilization, with event rates ranging from 0% to 37% (odds ratio (OR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 0.61; with minimal evidence of heterogeneity, I² = 26%; P = 0.23; seven studies; 1676 participants, moderate-quality evidence)" and similar for the following data. It is corrected in the Cochrane publication but not yet in pubmed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 26, Patrick Stokes commented:

      Our arXiv response can now be found here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1709.10248


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Sep 29, Patrick Stokes commented:

      Dear Dr. Marinazzo,

      Thank you for the comments posted here as well as those on arXiv.

      The main points of our work were to 1) characterize statistical properties of the traditional computation of conditional Granger-Geweke (GG) causality, and 2) to analyze how the dynamics of the system are represented in the GG-causality measure.

      We acknowledge that you, as well as Drs. Barnett, Barrett, and Seth, are correct that a state-space approach using a single model fit addresses the problems with bias and variance in conditional GG-causality estimates, employing either the spectral factorization in the frequency-domain or the DARE solution in the time-domain. Your simulation study posted on arXiv illustrates this clearly. Unfortunately, as you suggest in your arXiv article, many investigators are still using separate model fits. We hope our article raises awareness of the problems with doing so, particularly in frequency-domain analyses, which again can be avoided by using appropriate state-space methods under a single model fit.

      However, our second point about how dynamics are represented in GG-causality seems far more problematic, and is not resolved by the single-model computation, as it is an intrinsic property of GG-causality In most neuroscience studies, the objective is to identify and/or characterize the mechanism of some observed effect. As we have shown, the dynamics of the effect nodes are absent in GG-causality. Oscillations play an important role in systems neuroscience, and interpretation of causality measures appears particularly problematic in systems with strong frequency-dependent structure. Studies of oscillatory phenomena are invariably geared towards understanding the factors that contribute to oscillations observed at specific frequencies. Ignoring these observed dynamics is simply not compatible with the goal of understanding them.

      We focused our paper on analyzing GG-causality. Although we also expressed concerns about other related methods, we did not intend to dismiss efforts to develop improved methods for analyzing directed dynamical influences. To the contrary, we believe that such methods will be essential for gaining meaningful insights from modern neuroscience data. As we try to emphasize in our paper, a crucial priority will be to ensure that the models and derived quantities correspond appropriately to the scientific questions being considered. Developing such methods will require a closer partnership between neuroscientists and quantitative scientists going forward. In the meantime, as we suggest in our paper, a good starting point would be for analysts to pay more attention to the underlying models, the dynamics they represent, and the overall modeling process, all of which form the foundations for subsequent inferences on directed influences.

      We have submitted to arXiv a more detailed response to the arXiv posts from your group, and from Drs. Barnett, Barrett, and Seth. It will post in the next few days.

      We thank you again for your commentary and the insightful dialogue.

      Sincerely,

      Patrick A. Stokes and Patrick L. Purdon


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    3. On 2017 Sep 12, Daniele Marinazzo commented:

      Dear authors

      thanks a lot for this paper, that has collected quite some attention.

      I agree that interpretation issues of Granger Causality in Neuroscience exist (partially due to the historical unfortunate use of the name “causality”, as nicely described in previous literature).

      On the other hand I think that the paper uses a formulation of Granger causality which is outdated (albeit still used), and in doing so it dismisses the measure based on a suboptimal use of it.

      In order to provide a more balanced view, we replicated their simulations used the updated State Space implementation, proposed already some years ago, in which the pitfalls are mitigated or directly solved.

      You can find the report here https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.06990

      Another reply has been also posted, addressing more fundamental issues https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.08001

      Best regards


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 24, James Friel commented:

      This research demonstrates that infants suffering from gastrointestinal distress when fed bovine fortifier benefit from human milk based fortifier. Our research found in similar infants that systemic oxidative stress increased with increasing amounts of bovine fortifier. (Friel JK, Diehl-Jones B, Cockell KA, Chiu A, Rabanni R, Davies SS, Roberts LJ2nd. Evidence of oxidative stress in relation to feeding type during early life in premature infants. Pediatr Res. 2011 Feb;69(2):160-4).Using more subtle indicators than feeding intolerance supports the current findings. It may be that most premature infants would benefit from the human milk based fortifiers. Hopefully as their use increases they will become more affordable and thus more available.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 26, Christopher Southan commented:

      The chemical structures and protein targets for this exellent review have been resolved in this blog post https://cdsouthan.blogspot.se/2017/08/name-to-struc-resolution-for-yet.html


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 02, Randi Pechacek commented:

      Marcus Leung, first author of this article, wrote a blog post on microBEnet. It discusses his personal thoughts on the air microbiome of zero carbon buildings.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 09, Jacob H. Hanna commented:

      This is the third paper from Smith group describing deriving human transgene free naïve "pluripotent" reset cells. However, in all three papers, the authors have failed to describe whether they are able to generate teratomas from any of the described cell lines. It should be noted that mouse naive pluripotent cells have the intrinsic "self organizing capacity" to enter a formative/primed state after in vivo sub-cutaneous injection into immunodeficient mice and robustly make teratomas within 4-8 weeks. In our opinion, without evidence for teratoma formation competence of such transgene free naive cells they do not qualify to be annotated as pluripotent cells at all (neither naive nor primed). We raise the possibility that the cells being propagated in this study may be more akin to a non-pluripotent pre-iPSC/pre-ESC state. I hope the authors can clearly point out and directly address this critical caveat in their future publications.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 11, NephJC - Nephrology Journal Club commented:

      This randomised controlled trial of oral methylprednisolone on clinical outcomes in patients With IgA nephropathy was discussed on August 29th and September 6th 2017 on #NephJC, the open online nephrology journal club. Introductory comments written by Amit Langote are available at the NephJC website here.

      As one of the commoner conditions we Nephrologists face, there was lots of interest in the controversial results of this trial.

      The highlights of the tweetchat were:

      • There remains some uncertainty regarding the pathogenesis of IgA Nephropathy and the disease may actually comprise a spectrum of conditions. As such treatment should likely be stratified and this limits our ability to interpret RCTs of all-comers.

      • It would have been useful to see renal biopsy findings determine or influence randomization procedures.

      • The fact that the population were mostly Chinese may limit the generalizability of the results to western populations.

      • The GFR decline was much faster than expected or previously reported but this can be the case with certain Asian populations.

      • There is a general reluctance to use steroids in the absence of crescents or rapid GFR decline among Nephrologists currently and this trial further re-enforces this sentiment. We keenly await the results from the low-TESTING trial.

      Transcripts of the tweetchats, and curated versions as storify will be shortly available from the NephJC website.

      Interested individuals can track and join in the conversation by following @NephJC or #NephJC on twitter, liking @NephJC on facebook, signing up for the mailing list, or just visit the webpage at NephJC.com.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Sep 15, Robin Kok commented:

      Regarding bias, this 'review' is an exercise in confirmation bias.

      The rationale and execution of this systematic review are confusing at best, and misleading at worst. The authors invoke some metric of 'strength of evidence', which consists of tallying up positive conclusions from meta-analyses. For example, they conclude: "Protocols improve anxiety in adults: 8/9 meta-analyses", which we are to believe is strong evidence for cognitive bias modification (CBM).

      However:

      a) many of these meta-analyses draw from the same pool of primary studies, resulting in a great deal of overlap. Yet the authors treat these as if they are independent data points - demonstrably, they are not. If one would perform 10 meta-analyses on 40 studies, then it should come as no surprise that these meta-analyses report comparable outcomes. This greatly exaggerates positive effects by counting single studies multiple times. It is disconcerting that the peer reviewers did not spot this serious and elementary flaw. Then again, given that the entire process of submission, reviews and editorial acceptance took just over a month, reviewers and/or editor(s) must have been particularly pleased with this manuscript to favour it with an expedient review process.

      b) many of these meta-analyses - and the primary outcomes from which they draw data - fail even the most basic quality criteria for rigorously conducted meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials.

      c) many of these meta-analyses and primary studies reported therein were conducted by investigators with an investigator allegiance or other conflicts of interest. Studies performed by independent researchers often fail to find effects.

      d) there is evidence for extreme publication bias in the field of CBM, as apparent by both statistical indicators (which the authors mostly ignore), as well as by the great number of trials in official trial registries which are still awaiting publication - some for almost 10 years. The reader can easily find an abundance of file-drawered CBM studies in the WHO, ISRCTN, ANZCTR, and Clinicaltrials.gov trial registries.

      In short, this review is strongly biased in favour of cognitive bias modification and serves only to promote CBM as a 'promising therapy'. It adds to an already overwhelming number of positively biased reviews and analyses which essentially draw from the same pool of biased literature, strengthening the echo-chamber effect that seriously diminishes the scientific credibility of the CBM field. Reviews such as these are no more than opinion/promotion pieces in disguise, and should be interpreted with extreme caution as a reader unwary of these issues might easily conclude that there is overwhelming evidence for the efficacy of CBM - which there is not.

      If there is any value in CBM, it deserves fair testing - which means pre-registered, transparent replication efforts by disinterested, independent researchers. The disturbing phenomenon where biased CBM trials are recycled in reviews and meta-analyses in quick succession by biased investigators is the academic equivalent of an echo-chamber. And if CBM is to be seen as a serious alternative to psychotherapy, it is to be held to the same standards of methodology and transparency and step away from the cargo cult science we have seen so far.

      DECLARATION OF INTEREST: I have co-authored two (mostly critical) meta-analyses included in this review.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 07, DAVID ALLISON commented:

      A letter to the editor (and response) have been published indicating erroneous statistical inferences in the article such that the conclusions regarding differential effectiveness by pubertal status are unsubstantiated.

      See: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016-4285.comments


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 10, Shaun Khoo commented:

      Green Open Access: The accepted manuscript is available from the UNSW Institutional Repository.

      Open Data: The underlying data for this paper is available on Figshare.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Oct 13, Martine Crasnier-Mednansky commented:

      The authors really should not write in legend of figure 7, "Our results indicate that for robust growth on chitin, the transporters responsible for uptake of [ABC-transported] chitobiose and [PTS-transported] GlcNAc play the largest role". In fact, data in figure 6A indicate lack of either one of these two transporters does not impair growth on chitin at all. Also, the 'chitosan' PTS (PTS<sup>Chs</sup>, VC1282 in the figure), cannot possibly be a major player considering there is little glucosamine in chitin. Moreover, PTS<sup>Chs</sup> transport is most likely inhibited by Enzyme IIA<sup>Glc</sup>-dependent PTS transports (including PTS<sup>Nag</sup>), as it was reported chs expression is positively regulated by cAMP (Berg T, 2007).

      A proper question is whether or not the two transporters can be used simultaneously, as depicted in figure 7. Upon in vitro characterization of the periplasmic chitodextrinase activity (VCA0700 in Vibrio cholerae), Keyhani NO, 1996 proposed the ABC transport at first predominates up to a threshold concentration of (GlcNAc)n, n≥3, above which the PTS transport predominates. The two transport systems are not physiologically redundant.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 14, David Mage commented:

      Hauck et al., prepared an interesting report on Sudden Unexpected Infant Death (SUID) and priorities for research to explain it. They state in the very first sentences of their introduction that 25 years ago, research into SIDS led to a ‘breakthrough’ which identified that “infants who slept on their stomachs were significantly more likely to die of SIDS than infants who slept on their backs [1].” Breakthrough? Schmakethrough!

      Almost 75 years ago, Harald Abramson [2] published a proscription against the daytime practice of placing the infant in the prone position for sleep – unless constantly guarded. “The practice should, furthermore, be entirely done away with at night.” Fortunately, my thesis professor taught me the importance of reading the references of references to prevent such oversights when a blind eye is turned to the past literature. Reference 20 [Gilbert et al.] of their first reference [1] [Horne et al.] cites the Abramson 1944 paper.

      1. Horne RSC, Hauck FR, Moon RY. Sudden infant death syndrome and advice for safe sleeping. BMJ 2015;350:h1989 doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1989

      2. Abramson H. Accidental mechanical suffocation in infants. The Journal of Pediatrics 1944;25:404-413.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.