The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

No abstract

IMPORTANCEThe National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is a centralized, harmonized, highgranularity electronic health record repository that is the largest, most representative COVID-19 cohort to date. This multicenter data set can support robust evidence-based development of predictive and diagnostic tools and inform clinical care and policy.OBJECTIVES To evaluate COVID-19 severity and risk factors over time and assess the use of machine learning to predict clinical severity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn a retrospective cohort study of 1 926 526 US adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction >99% or antigen <1%) and adult patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection who served as controls from 34 medical centers nationwide between January 1, 2020, and December 7, 2020, patients were stratified using a World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and demographic characteristics. Differences between groups over time were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Random forest and XGBoost models were used to predict severe clinical course (death, discharge to hospice, invasive ventilatory support, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPatient demographic characteristics and COVID-19 severity using the World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and differences between groups over time using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTSThe cohort included 174 568 adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 44.4 [18.6] years; 53.2% female) and 1 133 848 adult controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [19.2] years; 57.1% female). Of the 174 568 adults with SARS-CoV-2, 32 472(18.6%) were hospitalized, and 6565 (20.2%) of those had a severe clinical course (invasive ventilatory support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, death, or discharge to hospice). Of the hospitalized patients, mortality was 11.6% overall and decreased from 16.4% in March to April 2020 to 8.6% in September to October 2020 (P = .002 for monthly trend). Using 64 inputs available on the first hospital day, this study predicted a severe clinical course using random forest and XGBoost models (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.87 for both) that were stable over time. The factor most strongly associated with clinical severity was pH; this result was consistent across machine learning methods. In a separate multivariable logistic regression model built for inference, (continued) Key Points Question In a US data resource large enough to adjust for multiple confounders, what risk factors are associated with COVID-19 severity and severity trajectory over time, and can machine learning models predict clinical severity? Findings In this cohort study of 174 568 adults with SARS-CoV-2, 32 472 (18.6%) were hospitalized and 6565 (20.2%) were severely ill, and first-day machine learning models accurately predicted clinical severity. Mortality was 11.6%

No abstract

Innovative strategies are needed to reduce the hypertension epidemic among African Americans. Reach Out was a faith-collaborative, mobile health, randomized, pilot intervention trial of four mobile health components to reduce high blood pressure (BP) compared to usual care. It was designed and tested within a community-based participatory research framework among African Americans recruited and randomized from churches in Flint, Michigan. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of the Reach Out processes. Feasibility was assessed by willingness to consent (acceptance of randomization), proportion of weeks participants texted their BP readings (intervention use), number lost to follow-up (retention), and responses to postintervention surveys and focus groups (acceptance of intervention). Of the 425 church members who underwent BP screening, 94 enrolled in the study and 73 (78%) completed the 6-month outcome assessment. Median age was 58 years, and 79% were women. Participants responded with their BPs on an average of 13.7 (SD = 10.7) weeks out of 26 weeks that the BP prompts were sent. All participants reported satisfaction with the intervention. Reach Out, a faith-collaborative, mobile health intervention was feasible. Further study of the efficacy of the intervention and additional mobile health strategies should be considered.

No abstract

Since late 2019, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has introduced a wide array of health challenges globally. In addition to a complex acute presentation that can affect multiple organ systems, increasing evidence points to long-term sequelae being common and impactful. As the worldwide scientific community forges ahead with efforts to characterize a wide range of outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the proliferation of available data has made it clear that formal definitions are needed in order to design robust and consistent studies of Long COVID that consistently capture variation in long-term outcomes. In the present study, we investigate the definitions used in the literature published to date and compare them against data available from electronic health records and patient-reported information collected via surveys. Long COVID holds the potential to produce a second public health crisis on the heels of the pandemic. Proactive efforts to identify the characteristics of this heterogeneous condition are imperative for a rigorous scientific effort to investigate and mitigate this threat.