INAUGURAL ARTICLE by a Recently Elected Academy Member:Functional redundancy of type I and type II receptors in the regulation of skeletal muscle growth by myostatin and activin A

Myostatin (MSTN) is a transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) family member that normally acts to limit muscle growth. The function of MSTN is partially redundant with that of another TGF-β family member, activin A. MSTN and activin A are capable of signaling through a complex of type II and type I receptors. Here, we investigated the roles of two type II receptors (ACVR2 and ACVR2B) and two type I receptors (ALK4 and ALK5) in the regulation of muscle mass by these ligands by genetically targeting these receptors either alone or in combination specifically in myofibers in mice. We show that targeting signaling in myofibers is sufficient to cause significant increases in muscle mass, showing that myofibers are the direct target for signaling by these ligands in the regulation of muscle growth. Moreover, we show that there is functional redundancy between the two type II receptors as well as between the two type I receptors and that all four type II/type I receptor combinations are utilized in vivo. Targeting signaling specifically in myofibers also led to reductions in overall body fat content and improved glucose metabolism in mice fed either regular chow or a high-fat diet, demonstrating that these metabolic effects are the result of enhanced muscling. We observed no effect, however, on either bone density or muscle regeneration in mice in which signaling was targeted in myofibers. The latter finding implies that MSTN likely signals to other cells, such as satellite cells, in addition to myofibers to regulate muscle homeostasis.

Myostatin (MSTN) is a secreted signaling molecule that normally acts to limit skeletal muscle growth (for review, see ref. 1). Mice lacking MSTN exhibit dramatic increases in muscle mass throughout the body, with individual muscles growing to about twice the normal size (2). MSTN appears to play two distinct roles in regulating muscle size, one to regulate the number of muscle fibers that are formed during development and a second to regulate the growth of those fibers postnatally. The sequence of MSTN has been highly conserved through evolution, with the mature MSTN peptide being identical in species as divergent as humans and turkeys (3). The function of MSTN has also been conserved, and targeted or naturally occurring mutations in MSTN have been shown to cause increased muscling in numerous species, including cattle (3–5), sheep (6), dogs (7), rabbits (8), rats (9), swine (10), goats (11), and humans (12). Numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have developed biologic agents capable of blocking MSTN activity, and these have been tested in clinical trials for a wide range of indications, including Duchenne and facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, inclusion body myositis, muscle atrophy following falls and hip fracture surgery, age-related sarcopenia, Charcot–Marie–Tooth disease, and cachexia due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, end-stage kidney disease, and cancer.The finding that certain inhibitors of MSTN signaling can increase muscle mass even in Mstn^−/− mice revealed that the function of MSTN as a negative regulator of muscle mass is partially redundant with at least one other TGF-β family member (13, 14), and subsequent studies have identified activin A as one of these cooperating ligands (15, 16). MSTN and activin A share many key regulatory and signaling components. For example, the activities of both MSTN and activin A can be modulated extracellularly by naturally occurring inhibitory binding proteins, including follistatin (17, 18) and the follistatin-related protein, FSTL-3 or FLRG (19, 20). Moreover, MSTN and activin A also appear to share receptor components. Based on in vitro studies, MSTN is capable of binding initially to the activin type II receptors, ACVR2 and ACVR2B (also called ActRIIA and ActRIIB) (18) followed by engagement of the type I receptors, ALK4 and ALK5 (21). In previous studies, we presented genetic evidence supporting a role for both ACVR2 and ACVR2B in mediating MSTN signaling and regulating muscle mass in vivo. Specifically, we showed that mice expressing a truncated, dominant-negative form of ACVR2B in skeletal muscle (18) or carrying deletion mutations in Acvr2 and/or Acvr2b (13) have significantly increased muscle mass. One limitation of the latter study, however, was that we could not examine the consequence of complete loss of both receptors using the deletion alleles, as double homozygous mutants die early during embryogenesis (22). Moreover, the roles that the two type I receptors, ALK4 and ALK5, play in regulating MSTN and activin A signaling in muscle in vivo have not yet been documented using genetic approaches. Here, we present the results of studies in which we used floxed alleles for each of the type II and type I receptor genes in order to target these receptors alone and in combination in muscle fibers. We show that these receptors are functionally redundant and that signaling through each of these receptors contributes to the overall control of muscle mass.     

Deep Brain Stimulation Compared With Contingency Management for the Treatment of Cocaine Use Disorders: A Threshold and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

ObjectivesCocaine is the second most frequently used illicit drug worldwide (after cannabis), and cocaine use disorder (CUD)-related deaths increased globally by 80% from 1990 to 2013. There is yet to be a regulatory-approved treatment. Emerging preclinical evidence indicates that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the nucleus accumbens may be a therapeutic option. Prior to expanding the costly investigation of DBS for treatment of CUD, it is important to ensure societal cost-effectiveness.AimsWe conducted a threshold and cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the success rate at which DBS would be equivalent to contingency management (CM), recently identified as the most efficacious therapy for treatments of CUDs.Materials and MethodsQuality of life, efficacy, and safety parameters for CM were obtained from previous literature. Costs were calculated from a societal perspective. Our model predicted the utility benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio resulting from two treatments on a one-, two-, and five-year timeline.ResultsOn a one-year timeline, DBS would need to impart a success rate (ie, cocaine free) of 70% for it to yield the same utility benefit (0.492 QALYs per year) as CM. At no success rate would DBS be more cost-effective (incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000) than CM during the first year. Nevertheless, as DBS costs are front loaded, DBS would need to achieve success rates of 74% and 51% for its cost-effectiveness to exceed that of CM over a two- and five-year period, respectively.ConclusionsWe find DBS would not be cost-effective in the short term (one year) but may be cost-effective in longer timelines. Since DBS holds promise to potentially be a cost-effective treatment for CUDs, future randomized controlled trials should be performed to assess its efficacy.     

Mortality,length of stay and costs associated with acute graft-versus-host disease during hospitalization for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Objective: Acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) is a common and life-threatening complication of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). The extent to which aGVHD increases inpatient costs associated with allo-HSCT has not been thoroughly evaluated. In this analysis, mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS) and costs associated with aGVHD during allo-HSCT admissions are evaluated.

Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of discharge records from the National Inpatient Sample database for patients receiving allo-HSCT between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2013. Allo-HSCT discharges with an aGVHD diagnosis were included in the aGVHD group and those without any graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) diagnosis comprised the non-GVHD group. Mortality, LOS and costs were compared between the two groups, as well as within subgroups, including age (<18 vs. ≥18 years) and survival status (alive vs. deceased) at discharge.

Results: Overall, mortality (16.2% vs. 5.3%; p?<?.01), median hospital LOS (42.0 vs. 26.0 days; p?<?.01) and median total costs ($173,144 vs. $98,982; p?<?.01) were significantly increased in patients with aGVHD versus those without GVHD during hospitalizations for allo-HSCT, irrespective of age group. Patients with aGVHD who were <18 years of age had a lower mortality rate but greater hospital LOS and total costs versus patients aged ≥18 years. Patients who died during allo-HSCT hospitalization had longer LOS and incurred greater costs than those who survived in both the aGVHD and non-GVHD groups.

Conclusion: Occurrence of aGVHD during allo-HSCT admissions resulted in a tripling of the mortality rate and a near doubling of hospital LOS and total costs. In addition, death during allo-HSCT hospitalizations was associated with greater healthcare utilization and costs. Effectively mitigating aGVHD may improve survival and substantially reduce hospital LOS and costs for allo-HSCT.