Pre-existing immunity does not impair the engraftment of CRISPR-Cas9-edited cells in rhesus macaques conditioned with busulfan or radiation.

CRISPR-Cas9-based therapeutic genome editing approaches hold promise to cure a variety of human diseases. Recent findings demonstrate pre-existing immunity for the commonly used Cas orthologs from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) and Staphylococcus aureus (SaCas9) in humans, which threatens the success of this powerful tool in clinical use. Thus, a comprehensive investigation and potential risk assessment are required to exploit the full potential of the system. Here, we investigated existence of immunity to SpCas9 and SaCas9 in control rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) alongside monkeys transplanted with either lentiviral transduced or CRISPR-SpCas9 ribonucleoprotein (RNP)-edited cells. We observed significant levels of Cas9 antibodies in the peripheral blood of all transplanted and non-transplanted control animals. Transplantation of ex vivo transduced or SpCas9-mediated BCL11A enhancer-edited cells did not alter the levels of Cas9 antibodies in rhesus monkeys. Following stimulation of peripheral blood cells with SpCas9 or SaCas9, neither Cas9-specific T cells nor cytokine induction were detected. Robust and durable editing frequencies and expression of high levels of fetal hemoglobin in BCL11A enhancer-edited rhesus monkeys with no evidence of an immune response (>3 years) provide an optimistic outlook for the use of ex vivo CRISPR-SpCas9 (RNP)-edited cells.

Effect of vaccination on transmission of COVID-19: an observational study in healthcare workers and their households

BackgroundThe effect of vaccination for COVID-19 on onward transmission is unknown. MethodsA national record linkage study determined documented COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations in unvaccinated household members of vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare workers from 8th December 2020 to 3rd March 2021. The primary endpoint was COVID-19 14 days following the first dose. ResultsThe cohort comprised of 194,362 household members (mean age 31{middle dot}1 {+/-} 20{middle dot}9 years) and 144,525 healthcare workers (mean age 44{middle dot}4 {+/-} 11{middle dot}4 years). 113,253 (78{middle dot}3%) of healthcare workers received at least one dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and 36,227 (25{middle dot}1%) received a second dose. There were 3,123 and 4,343 documented COVID-19 cases and 175 and 177 COVID-19 hospitalisations in household members of healthcare workers and healthcare workers respectively. Household members of vaccinated healthcare workers had a lower risk of COVID-19 case compared to household members of unvaccinated healthcare worker (rate per 100 person-years 9{middle dot}40 versus 5{middle dot}93; HR 0{middle dot}70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0{middle dot}63 to 0{middle dot}78). The effect size for COVID-19 hospitalisation was similar, with the confidence interval crossing the null (HR 0{middle dot}77 [95% CI 0{middle dot}53 to 1{middle dot}10]). The rate per 100 person years was lower in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated healthcare workers for documented (20{middle dot}13 versus 8{middle dot}51; HR 0{middle dot}45 [95% CI 0{middle dot}42 to 0{middle dot}49]) and hospitalized COVID-19 (0{middle dot}97 versus 0{middle dot}14; HR 0{middle dot}16 [95% CI 0{middle dot}09 to 0{middle dot}27]). Compared to the period before the first dose, the risk of documented COVID-19 case was lower at [≥] 14 days after the second dose for household members (HR 0{middle dot}46 [95% CI 0{middle dot}30to 0{middle dot}70]) and healthcare workers (HR 0{middle dot}08 [95% CI 0{middle dot}04 to 0{middle dot}17]). InterpretationVaccination of health care workers was associated with a substantial reduction in COVID-19 cases in household contacts consistent with an effect of vaccination on transmission.

Risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19 among teachers compared to healthcare workers and other working-age adults. A nationwide case-control study

ObjectiveTo determine the risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 among teachers and their household members, overall and compared to healthcare workers and the general working-age population. DesignPopulation-based nested case-control study. SettingsScotland, March 2020 to January 2021. Before and after schools re-opened in early August 2020. ParticipantsAll cases of COVID-19 in Scotland in adults ages 21 to 65 (n = 83,817) and a random sample of controls matched on age, sex and general practice (n = 841,708). ExposureIndividuals identified as actively teaching in a Scottish school by the General Teaching Council for Scotland, and household members of such individuals identified via the Unique Property Reference Number. ComparatorIndividuals identified as healthcare workers in Scotland, their household members, and the remaining "general population" of working-age adults. Main outcomesThe primary outcome was hospitalisation with COVID-19 defined in anyone testing positive with COVID-19 in hospital, admitted to hospital within 28 days of a positive test, and/or diagnosed with COVID-19 on discharge from hospital. Severe COVID-19 was defined as individuals admitted to intensive care or dying within 28 days of a positive test or assigned COVID-19 as a cause of death. ResultsMost teachers were young (mean age 42), female (80%) and had no underlying conditions (84%). The cumulative incidence (risk) of hospitalisation with COVID-19 was below 1% for all of the working age adults. In the period after school re-opening, compared to the general population, in conditional logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, general practice, deprivation, underlying conditions and number of adults in the household, the relative risk in teachers (among 18,479 cases and controls) for hospitalisation was rate ratio (RR) 0.97 (95%CI 0.72-1.29) and for severe COVID-19 was RR 0.27 (95%CI 0.09-0.77). Equivalent rate ratios for household members of teachers were 0.97 (95%CI 0.74-1.27) and 0.67 (95%CI 0.36-1.24), and for healthcare workers were 1.82 (95%CI 1.55-2.14) and 1.76 (95%CI 1.22-2.56), respectively. ConclusionCompared to working-age adults who are otherwise similar, teachers and their household members are not at increased risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19 and are at lower risk of severe COVID-19. These findings are broadly reassuring for adults engaged in face to face teaching.

Impact of COVID-19 on Care-Home Mortality and Life Expectancy in Scotland

IntroductionCOVID-19 deaths are commoner among care-home residents, but the mortality burden has not been quantified. MethodsCare-home residency was identified via a national primary care registration database linked to national mortality data. Life expectancy was estimated using Makeham-Gompertz models, to (i) describe yearly life expectancy from Nov 2015 to Oct 2020 (ii) compare life expectancy (during 2016-2018) between care-home residents and the wider Scottish population and (iii) apply care-home life expectancy estimates to COVID-19 death counts to estimate years of life lost (YLL). ResultsAmong care-home residents, life expectancy in 2015/16 to 2019/20 ranged from 2.7 to 2.3 years for women and 2.3 to 1.8 years for men. Life expectancy was lowest in 2019/20. Age-sex specific life expectancy in 2016-2018 in care-home residents was lower than in the Scottish population (10 and 2.5 years in those aged 70 and 90 respectively). Rather than using national life tables, applying care-home specific life expectancies to COVID-19 deaths yields, mean YLLs for care-home residents were 2.6 and 2.2 for women and men respectively, with total care-home resident YLLs of 3,560 years in women and 2,046 years in men. In people aged over-70, approximately half of deaths and a quarter of YLL attributed to COVID-19 were accounted for by the 5% of over-70s who were care-home residents. ConclusionPrioritising care-home residents for vaccination is justified not only in terms of total deaths, but also in terms of years of life lost. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed to 1st December 2020, with the terms ("nursing home" OR "care-home" OR "long-term care" OR "residential care") AND ("mortality" OR "life expectancy" OR "length of stay"). We also searched for studies specific to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on those living in care-homes. We restricted our search to publications in English. Usual care-home life expectancy, in a UK context, has not previously been defined. One systematic review of length of stay was identified, which found significant heterogeneity in factors and associations. The impact of COVID-19 on excess mortality among care-home residents was noted, but the impact on life expectancy was not reported. Studies evaluating life expectancy among older people in the COVID-19 pandemic have not taken account of residency in their estimates. Added value of this studyUsing Scottish national representative linked data we describe the usual life expectancy of older adults (aged [≥]70 years) living in care-homes, compared to older people living elsewhere. Deaths among care-home residents account for a considerable proportion of all mortality in older adults, around 19% for men and 30% for women. Life expectancy in care-home residents during the pandemic fell by almost 6 months, from 2.7 to 2.3 years in men and 2.1 to 1.8 years in women. In total, over 5,600 Years of Life were Lost (YLL) by care-home residents in Scotland who died with COVID-19. Around half of COVID-19 deaths and a quarter of YLL in those aged 70 years and over occurred among care-home residents. During the COVID-19 pandemic a smaller proportion of deaths among care-home residents occurred in hospitals. Implications of all the available evidencePrioritising the 5% of older adults who are care-home residents for vaccination against COVID-19 is justified both in terms of total deaths and total years of life lost. Individual and societal planning for care needs in older age relies on understanding usual care-home life expectancy and patterns of mortality. Understanding life expectancy may help clinicians, residents and their families make decisions about their health care, facilitating more informed discussions around their priorities and wishes. Population-wide estimates of YLL and burden of disease should take account of residency status, given the significant differences between life expectancy of those living in care-homes from their peers in other settings.

Sharing a household with children and risk of COVID-19: a study of over 300,000 adults living in healthcare worker households in Scotland

ObjectiveChildren are relatively protected from COVID-19, possibly due to cross-protective immunity. We investigated if contact with children also affords adults a degree of protection from COVID-19. DesignCohort study based on linked administrative data. SettingScotland Study populationAll NHS Scotland healthcare workers and their household contacts as of March 2020. Main exposureNumber of young children (0-11 years) living in the participants household. Main outcomesCOVID-19 requiring hospitalisation, and any COVID-19 (any positive test for SARS-CoV-2) in adults aged [≥]18 years between 1 March and 12 October 2020. Results241,266, 41,198, 23,783 and 3,850 adults shared a household with 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more young children respectively. Over the study period, the risk of COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation was reduced progressively with increasing numbers of household children - fully adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.93 per child (95% CI 0.79-1.10). The risk of any COVID-19 was similarly reduced, with the association being statistically significant (aHR per child 0.93; 95% CI 0.88-0.98). After schools reopened to all children in August 2020, no association was seen between exposure to young children and risk of any COVID-19 (aHR per child 1.03; 95% CI 0.92-1.14). ConclusionBetween March and October 2020, living with young children was associated with an attenuated risk of any COVID-19 and COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation among adults living in healthcare worker households. There was no evidence that living with young children increased adults risk of COVID-19, including during the period after schools re-opened.

Risk of hospitalisation with coronavirus disease 2019 in healthcare workers and their households:a nationwide linkage cohort study

ObjectiveMany healthcare staff work in high-risk settings for contracting and transmitting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2. Their risk of hospitalisation for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and that of their households, is poorly understood. Design and settings and participantsDuring the peak period for COVID-19 infection in Scotland (1st March 2020 to 6th June 2020) we conducted a national record linkage study to compare the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation among healthcare workers (age: 18-65 years), their households and other members of the general population. Main outcomeHospitalisation with COVID-19 ResultsThe cohort comprised 158,445 healthcare workers, the majority being patient facing (90,733 / 158,445; 57.3%), and 229,905 household members. Of all COVID-19 hospitalisations in the working age population (18-65-year-old), 17.2% (360 / 2,097) were in healthcare workers or their households. Adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, socio-economic deprivation and comorbidity, the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation in non-patient facing healthcare workers and their households was similar to the risk in the general population (hazards ratio [HR] 0.81; 95%CI 0.52-1.26 and 0.86; 95%CI 0.49-1.51 respectively). In models adjusting for the same covariates however, patient facing healthcare workers, compared to non-patient facing healthcare workers, were at higher risk (HR 3.30; 95%CI 2.13-5.13); so too were household members of patient facing healthcare workers (HR 1.79; 95%CI 1.10-2.91). On sub-dividing patient-facing healthcare workers into those who worked in front-door, intensive care and non-intensive care aerosol generating settings and other, those in front door roles were at higher risk (HR 2.09; 95%CI 1.49-2.94). For most patient facing healthcare workers and their households, the estimated absolute risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation was less than 0.5% but was 1% and above in older men with comorbidity. ConclusionsHealthcare workers and their households contribute a sixth of hospitalised COVID-19 cases. Whilst the absolute risk of hospitalisation was low overall, patient facing healthcare workers and their households had 3- and 2-fold increased risks of COVID-19 hospitalisation.

High-throughput imaging method for direct assessment of GM1 ganglioside levels in mammalian cells.

GM1-gangliosidosis is an inherited autosomal recessive disorder caused by mutations in the gene GLB1, which encodes acid ß-galactosidase (ß-gal). The lack of activity in this lysosomal enzyme leads to accumulation of GM1 gangliosides (GM1) in cells. We have developed a high-content-imaging method to assess GM1 levels in fibroblasts that can be used to evaluate substrate reduction in treated GLB1(-/-) cells [1]. This assay allows fluorescent quantification in a multi-well system which generates unbiased and statistically significant data. Fluorescently labeled Cholera Toxin B subunit (CTXB), which specifically binds to GM1 gangliosides, was used to detect in situ GM1 levels in a fixed monolayer of fibroblasts. This sensitive, rapid, and inexpensive method facilitates in vitro drug screening in a format that allows a high number of replicates using low working volumes.

Enzyme replacement for GM1-gangliosidosis: Uptake, lysosomal activation, and cellular disease correction using a novel ß-galactosidase:RTB lectin fusion.

New enzyme delivery technologies are required for treatment of lysosomal storage disorders with significant pathologies associated with the so-called "hard-to-treat" tissues and organs. Genetic deficiencies in the GLB1 gene encoding acid ß-galactosidase lead to GM1-gangliosidosis or Morquio B, lysosomal diseases with predominant disease manifestation associated with the central nervous system or skeletal system, respectively. Current lysosomal ERTs are delivered into cells based on receptor-mediated endocytosis and do not effectively address several hard-to-treat organs including those critical for GM1-gangliosidosis patients. Lectins provide alternative cell-uptake mechanisms based on adsorptive-mediated endocytosis and thus may provide unique biodistribution for lysosomal disease therapeutics. In the current study, genetic fusions of the plant galactose/galactosamine-binding lectin, RTB, and the human acid ß-galactosidase enzyme were produced using a plant-based bioproduction platform. ß-gal:RTB and RTB:ß-gal fusion products retained both lectin activity and ß-galactosidase activity. Purified proteins representing both fusion orientations were efficiently taken up into GM1 patient fibroblasts and mediated the reduction of GM1 ganglioside substrate with activities matching mammalian cell-derived ß-galactosidase. In contrast, plant-derived ß-gal alone was enzymatically active but did not mediate uptake or correction indicating the need for either lectin-based (plant product) or mannose-6-phosphate-based (mammalian product) delivery. Native ß-galactosidase undergoes catalytic activation (cleavage within the C-terminal region) in lysosomes and is stabilized by association with protective protein/cathepsin A. Enzymatic activity and lysosomal protein processing of the RTB fusions were assessed following internalization into GM1 fibroblasts. Within 1-4h, both ß-gal:RTB and RTB:ß-gal were processed to the ~64kDa "activated" ß-gal form; the RTB lectin was cleaved and rapidly degraded. The activated ß-gal was still detected at 48h suggesting interactions with protective protein/cathepsin A. Uptake-saturation analyses indicated that the RTB adsorptive-mediated mechanisms of ß-gal:RTB supported significantly greater accumulation of ß-galactose activity in fibroblasts compared to the receptor-mediated mechanisms of the mammalian cell-derived ß-gal. These data demonstrate that plant-made ß-gal:RTB functions as an effective replacement enzyme for GM1-gangliosidosis - delivering enzyme into cells, enabling essential lysosomal processing, and mediating disease substrate clearance at the cellular level. RTB provides novel uptake behaviors and thus may provide new receptor-independent strategies that could broadly impact lysosomal disease treatments.

Detection of respiratory viruses with a multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay (MultiCode-PLx Respiratory Virus Panel) in patients with hematologic malignancies.

Respiratory viral pathogens are a common cause of morbidity in patients with hematologic malignancies. Sensitive molecular assays have increased the detection of common respiratory viruses and expanded the panel of detectable viruses. Both a rapid viral culture with direct fluorescence antibody (DFA) staining and a PCR-based assay (MultiCode-PLx Respiratory Virus Panel) were performed on patients with hematologic malignancies, who underwent collection of a nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage from October 2006 to April 2007. Eighty-two samples from 70 patients were obtained; all patients had upper respiratory tract symptoms. Respiratory viruses were detected in 10 samples (12%) by conventional virological methods and in 31 samples (38%) by the MultiCode-PLx assay. This increased diagnostic yield resulted from better sensitivity for those viruses detectable by both methods and detection of viruses not covered by the antigen detection/rapid culture method (human metapneumovirus, coronaviruses and rhinoviruses). The MultiCode-PLx assay frequently identified respiratory viral infections which are not detected by rapid viral culture/DFA; 40% of these patients had pneumonia in addition to the upper respiratory tract symptoms. Improved diagnostics for respiratory viruses may lead to more effective management and better outcomes in this patient population.