Building small dams can decrease malaria: a comparative study from Sundargarh District, Orissa, India

The adverse health effect of environmental changes brought about with the construction of large and small dams has often been reported. Here, we present results of a 5-year (2001-2005) study documenting the positive effect of such developmental projects in reducing malaria in an area where malaria transmission is mainly due to the highly efficient anthropophagic vector Anopheles fluviatilis with some contribution from Anopheles culicifacies. The former breeds exclusively in the slow-flowing streams and the latter breeds in a variety of habitats. The study was conducted in San Dulakudar village and comparisons were made with two control villages situated near the stream with similar topography and malaria transmission pattern. Epidemiological data was collected through longitudinal weekly surveillance and cross-sectional surveys in all the study villages. The mean annual malaria incidence rates due to Plasmodium falciparum in children of 1-5 years age group during 2001 before construction of dam was 1304.3 and 785.7 cases/1000 population in dam site village and control villages, respectively. However, after construction of dam, there was gradual reduction in the malaria cases in dam site village and during 2005 the incidence was significantly reduced to 181.8 (P<0.01) whereas it was increased to 1000 in control villages without any significant change in comparison to baseline year (P>0.05). A significant reduction in malaria incidence and parasite rate was also recorded in all the age groups in dam site village without registering any significant change in control villages. The construction of a small dam in the study village altered the water flow above and below the dam thereby making it unfavourable for the breeding of A. fluviatilis which in turn brought about significant impact on malaria transmission.     

Identification of a point mutation in the catalytic domain of the protooncogene c-kit in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients who have mastocytosis with an associated hematologic disorder.

Both stem cells and mast cells express c-kit and proliferate after exposure to c-kit ligand. Mutations in c-kit may enhance or interfere with the ability of c-kit receptor to initiate the intracellular pathways resulting in cell proliferation. These observations suggested to us that mastocytosis might in some patients result from mutations in c-kit. cDNA synthesized from peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients with indolent mastocytosis, mastocytosis with an associated hematologic disorder, aggressive mastocytosis, solitary mastocytoma, and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia unassociated with mastocytosis was thus screened for a mutation of c-kit. This analysis revealed that four of four mastocytosis patients with an associated hematologic disorder with predominantly myelodysplastic features had an A-->T substitution at nt 2468 of c-kit mRNA that causes an Asp-816-->Val substitution. One of one patient examined who had mastocytosis with an associated hematologic disorder had the corresponding mutation in genomic DNA. Identical or similar amino acid substitutions in mast cell lines result in ligand-independent autophosphorylation of the c-kit receptor. This mutation was not identified in the patients within the other disease categories or in 67 of 67 controls. The identification of the point mutation Asp816Val in c-kit in patients with mastocytosis with an associated hematologic disorder provides insight not only into the pathogenesis of this form of mastocytosis but also into how hematopoiesis may become dysregulated and may serve to provide a means of confirming the diagnosis, assessing prognosis, and developing intervention strategies.     

The trigeminocardiac reflex – a comparison with the diving reflex in humans

The trigeminocardiac reflex (TCR) has previously been described in the literature as a reflexive response of bradycardia, hypotension, and gastric hypermotility seen upon mechanical stimulation in the distribution of the trigeminal nerve. The diving reflex (DR) in humans is characterized by breath-holding, slowing of the heart rate, reduction of limb blood flow and a gradual rise in the mean arterial blood pressure. Although the two reflexes share many similarities, their relationship and especially their functional purpose in humans have yet to be fully elucidated. In the present review, we have tried to integrate and elaborate these two phenomena into a unified physiological concept. Assuming that the TCR and the DR are closely linked functionally and phylogenetically, we have also highlighted the significance of these reflexes in humans.     

Occurrence of virulence genes, 16S rRNA methylases,and plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance genes in CTX-M-producing Escherichia coli from Pakistan

The aim of the study was to conduct a comprehensive molecular characterization of extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli collected from Pakistan. Genetic relatedness among 98 ESBL-producing E. coli was measured by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). The presence of genes encoding ESBLs, virulence factors (VFs), 16S rRNA methylases, plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance (PMQR) encoding elements, plasmid replicon types, phylogenetic groups of E. coli, prevalence of the worldwide disseminated clone E. coli ST131, and phylogrouping of CTX-M enzymes was investigated by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). All isolates carried bla _CTX-M genes and, except for one isolate from CTX-M phylogroup 9, they all belonged to CTX-M phylogroup 1. The isolates were genetically diverse with PFGE. Phylogenetic group D (36 %) was most abundant in this collection of E. coli, whereas isolates belonging to B2 (22 %) had the highest content of virulence genes. PMQR genes were found in 84.6 % of the isolates; among them, 93 % isolates were positive for variants of acetyltransferases (aac(6′)-lb-cr), whereas qnrB, qepA, and qnrS were present in 11 %, 5 %, and 4 % of the isolates, respectively. Only 3 % of the isolates contained genes encoding 16S rRNA methylases. The most abundant replicon type was IncF (96 %), and 18 % of the isolates belonged to the ST131 clone. Out of 34 investigated VFs, 24 genes encoding different types of adhesins, protectins, toxins, siderophores, and other VFs were found. Although the isolates in this collection were highly resistant to many antimicrobials, susceptibility to amikacin and meropenem was retained.     

Renin angiotensin system modulates mTOR pathway through AT2R in HIVAN

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) has been reported to contribute to the development of HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN). We hypothesized that HIV may be activating renal tissue mTOR pathway through renin angiotensin system (RAS) via Angiotensin Receptor Type II receptor (AT2R). Renal tissues of Vpr transgenic and Tg26 (HIVAN) mice displayed enhanced phosphorylation of mTOR and p70S6K. Aliskiren, a renin inhibitor attenuated phosphorylation of both mTOR and p70S6K in renal tissues of HIVAN mice. Interestingly, Angiotensin Receptor Type I (AT1R) blockade did not modulate renal tissue phosphorylation of mTOR in HIVAN mice; on the other hand, AT2R blockade attenuated renal tissue phosphorylation of mTOR in HIVAN mice. In vitro studies, both renin and Ang II displayed enhanced mouse tubular cell (MTC) phosphorylation of p70S6K in a dose dependent manner. HIV/MTC also displayed enhanced phosphorylation of both mTOR and p70S6K; interestingly this effect of HIV was further enhanced by losartan (an AT1R blocker). On the other hand, AT2R blockade attenuated HIV-induced tubular cell phosphorylation of mTOR and p70S6K, whereas, AT2R agonist enhanced phosphorylation of mTOR and p70S6K. These findings indicate that HIV stimulates mTOR pathway in HIVAN through the activation of renin angiotensin system via AT2R.     

Life insurance: genomic stratification and risk classification

With the development and increasing accessibility of new genomic tools such as next-generation sequencing, genome-wide association studies, and genomic stratification models, the debate on genetic discrimination in the context of life insurance became even more complex, requiring a review of current practices and the exploration of new scenarios. In this perspective, a multidisciplinary group of international experts representing different interests revisited the genetics and life insurance debate during a 2-day symposium ‘Life insurance: breast cancer research and genetic risk prediction seminar'' held in Quebec City, Canada on 24 and 25 September 2012. Having reviewed the current legal, social, and ethical issues on the use of genomic information in the context of life insurance, the Expert Group identified four main questions: (1) Have recent developments in genomics and related sciences changed the contours of the genetics and life insurance debate? (2) Are genomic results obtained in a research context relevant for life insurance underwriting? (3) Should predictive risk assessment and risk stratification models based on genomic data also be used for life insurance underwriting? (4) What positive actions could stakeholders in the debate take to alleviate concerns over the use of genomic information by life insurance underwriters? This paper presents a summary of the discussions and the specific action items recommended by the Expert Group.Access to genetic information by life insurers has been a topic of discussion for many years.¹ The possibility of using genetic data to underwrite an applicant''s insurance policy has given rise to concerns about the emergence of ‘genetic discrimination''. Genetic discrimination in the field of life insurance is not necessarily illegal in that in insurance underwriting questions about health, family history of disease, or genetic information may constitute legal exceptions to antidiscrimination legislation.^{2, 3} Nevertheless, the expression ‘genetic discrimination'' has acquired public notoriety⁴ and we will use more neutral language in this paper.Countries including Canada, the United States, Russia, and Japan⁵ have chosen not to adopt laws specifically prohibiting access to genetic data for underwriting by life insurers.⁶ In these countries, life insurance underwriters treat genetic data like other types of medical or lifestyle data. However, a growing number of countries such as Belgium, France, and Norway⁵ have chosen to adopt laws to prevent or limit insurers'' access to genetic data for life insurance underwriting. Other countries including Finland and the United Kingdom have developed voluntary arrangements with the industry (ie moratoria) with similar objectives.⁷Life insurance is a private contract between the policy-holder and the insurer. Its principal role is to provide financial security to the beneficiaries in the event of the insured''s death.⁸ Because of this important role, life insurance is often required, or strongly recommended for those seeking loans to acquire primary social goods, like housing or cars.⁹ In Europe, a consequence of the advent of the welfare state is that private insurance has increasingly played a complementary and supplementary role to social insurance by offering additional security and protection to the population. Thus, in this region, insurance is often considered as a social good that allows individuals to live a comfortable life and as a tool to promote social integration.¹⁰ In other regions of the world, this social role of life insurance is also recognized to a lesser extent. Given this social role, equitable access to life insurance is perceived as a sensitive issue and cases of denial looked upon negatively in popular media. Although documented incidents of denial or of increased premiums on the basis of genetic information have remained limited to the context of a few relatively well known, highly penetrant, familial, adult-onset, genetic conditions,¹¹ they have nevertheless generated significant public concern. Fear that insurers will have access to genetic information generated in a clinical or research setting for use in underwriting has been reported by several studies as a reason for non-participation in genetic research or recommended clinical genetic testing.^{12, 13, 14}The clinical utility of genetic testing for monogenic disorders such as Huntington disease, and hereditary forms of cancer are well established.¹⁵ However, genomic risk profiles based on the known common susceptibility variants have limited utility in risk prediction at the individual level, although they could be used for risk stratification in prevention programmes in populations.¹⁶ Today, a new era of genomic research has made it increasingly affordable to scan the entire genome of an individual. Researchers and physicians can interpret these data together with medical and lifestyle information in the form of sophisticated risk prediction models.¹⁷ Moreover, improvement in computing technologies coupled with the Internet make predictive information increasingly available, whether through direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests, genetic data sharing online communities, or international research database projects. Given these important technological and scientific changes, and their impact on various stakeholders. The term ‘stakeholders'' is used in this text to refer to the following groups of individuals: actuaries (person who computes insurance risk and premium rates based on statistical data), academic researchers, community representatives, ethics committees, genetic counsellors, genomic researchers, human rights experts, insurers, governmental representatives, non-governmental organisations, patient representatives, physicians, policy makers, popular media, reinsurers (company in charge of calculating the risk and premium amount for insuring a particular customer), research participants, and underwriters (company or person in charge of calculating the risk involved in providing insurance for a particular customer and to decide how much should be paid for the premium). This list is not meant to be exhaustive as relevant new groups may emerge as this topic further develops in the coming years. A multidisciplinary group of international experts representing different interests (hereinafter ‘the Expert Group'') revisited the genetics and life insurance debate. The following text presents a summary of the issues discussed and the ‘Action Items'' agreed upon by the Expert Group at the ‘Life Insurance, Risk Stratification, and Personalized Medicine Symposium''.