Preparing healthcare leaders of the digital age with an integrative artificial intelligence curriculum: a pilot study.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly being introduced into the clinical workflow of many specialties. Despite the need to train physicians who understand the utility and implications of AI and mitigate a growing skills gap, no established consensus exists on how to best introduce AI concepts to medical students during preclinical training. This study examined the effectiveness of a pilot Digital Health Scholars (DHS) non-credit enrichment elective that paralleled the Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine's first-year preclinical curriculum with a focus on introducing AI algorithms and their applications in the concurrently occurring systems-blocks. From September 2022 to March 2023, ten self-selected first-year students enrolled in the elective curriculum run in parallel with four existing curricular blocks (Immunology, Hematology, Cardiology, and Pulmonology). Each DHS block consisted of a journal club, a live-coding demonstration, and an integration session led by a researcher in that field. Students' confidence in explaining the content objectives (high-level knowledge, implications, and limitations of AI) was measured before and after each block and compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. Students reported significant increases in confidence in describing the content objectives after all four blocks (Immunology: U = 4.5, p = 0.030; Hematology: U = 1.0, p = 0.009; Cardiology: U = 4.0, p = 0.019; Pulmonology: U = 4.0, p = 0.030) as well as an average overall satisfaction level of 4.29/5 in rating the curriculum content. Our study demonstrates that a digital health enrichment elective that runs in parallel to an institution's preclinical curriculum and embeds AI concepts into relevant clinical topics can enhance students' confidence in describing the content objectives that pertain to high-level algorithmic understanding, implications, and limitations of the studied models. Building on this elective curricular design, further studies with a larger enrollment can help determine the most effective approach in preparing future physicians for the AI-enhanced clinical workflow.

Exposure to the non-phthalate plasticizer di-heptyl succinate is less disruptive to C57bl/6N mouse recovery from a myocardial infarction than DEHP, TOTM or related di-octyl succinate.

Phthalate plasticizers are incorporated into plastics to make them soft and malleable, but are known to leach out of the final product into their surroundings with potential detrimental effects to human and ecological health. The replacement of widely-used phthalate plasticizers, such as di-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), that are of known toxicity, by the commercially-available alternative Tris(2-ethylhexyl) tri-mellitate (TOTM) is increasing. Additionally, several newly designed "green" plasticizers, including di-heptyl succinate (DHPS) and di-octyl succinate (DOS) have been identified as potential replacements. However, the impact of plasticizer exposure from medical devices on patient recovery is unknown and, moreover, the safety of TOTM, DHPS, and DOS is not well established in the context of patient recovery. To study the direct effect of clinically based chemical exposures, we exposed C57bl/6 N male and female mice to DEHP, TOTM, DOS, and DHPS during recovery from cardiac surgery and assessed survival, cardiac structure and function, immune cell infiltration into the cardiac wound and activation of the NLRP3 inflammasome. Male, but not female, mice treated in vivo with DEHP and TOTM had greater cardiac dilation, reduced cardiac function, increased infiltration of neutrophils, monocytes, and macrophages and increased expression of inflammasome receptors and effectors, thereby suggesting impaired recovery in exposed mice. In contrast, no impact was detected in female mice and male mice exposed to DOS and DHPS. To examine the direct effects in cells involved in wound healing, we treated human THP-1 macrophages with the plasticizers in vitro and found DEHP induced greater NLRP3 expression and activation. These results suggest that replacing current plasticizers with non-phthalate-based plasticizers may improve patient recovery, especially in the male population. In our assessment, DHPS is a promising possibility for a non-toxic biocompatible plasticizer.

Acute exposure to phthalates during recovery from a myocardial infarction induces greater inflammasome activation in male C57bl/6N mice.

Plasticizers escape from medical devices used in cardiac surgery into patient blood and tissues. Increased di-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) exposure is correlated with chronic inflammation in vivo and increased cytokine release in exposed monocytes in vitro. To determine if acute phthalate exposure enhanced inflammation in a model of cardiac damage, we measured immune cell infiltration, inflammasome expression and cardiac function in male C57bl/6 N mice exposed to phthalates during recovery from a surgically-induced myocardial infarction (MI). Phthalate exposed mice had greater neutrophil and pro-inflammatory macrophage infiltration, greater cardiac dilation and reduced cardiac function when compared with control mice. The greater expression of NLRP3 and NLRP6, but not AIM2 or P2xR7, in the infarcts of phthalate exposed versus control mice suggests a selectivity in pattern recognition receptor activation. Treatment of human THP-1 macrophages with phthalates revealed increased NLRP3 and NLRP6 expression and induction of a pro-inflammatory macrophage population. Pre-treatment with the PPARγ antagonist GW9662 reduced these increases. An increase in expression of IL-1R, MyD88 and IRAK4 in infarcts of phthalate exposed mice and THP-1 cells argues for greater priming downstream of IL-1R signaling and increased susceptibility for inflammasome activation. Importantly, these effects were moderated in vivo when phthalate exposure was reduced by 90% and when the NLRP3 antagonist MCC950 was co-administered. Our study suggests that reductions in phthalate exposure, which might be realized using plasticizers with a reduced ability to leach out from plastic, or short-term treatment with an anti-inflammasome may improve healing post-surgery.

Emerging concepts and opportunities for endocrine disruptor screening of the non-EATS modalities.

Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are ubiquitous in the environment and involve diverse chemical-receptor interactions that can perturb hormone signaling. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has validated several EDC-receptor bioassays to detect endocrine active chemicals and has established guidelines for regulatory testing of EDCs. Focus on testing over the past decade has been initially directed to EATS modalities (estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and steroidogenesis) and validated tests for chemicals that exert effects through non-EATS modalities are less established. Due to recognition that EDCs are vast in their mechanisms of action, novel bioassays are needed to capture the full scope of activity. Here, we highlight the need for validated assays that detect non-EATS modalities and discuss major international efforts underway to develop such tools for regulatory purposes, focusing on non-EATS modalities of high concern (i.e., retinoic acid, aryl hydrocarbon receptor, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, and glucocorticoid signaling). Two case studies are presented with strong evidence amongst animals and human studies for non-EATS disruption and associations with wildlife and human disease. This includes metabolic syndrome and insulin signaling (case study 1) and chemicals that impact the cardiovascular system (case study 2). This is relevant as obesity and cardiovascular disease represent two of the most significant health-related crises of our time. Lastly, emerging topics related to EDCs are discussed, including recognition of crosstalk between the EATS and non-EATS axis, complex mixtures containing a variety of EDCs, adverse outcome pathways for chemicals acting through non-EATS mechanisms, and novel models for testing chemicals. Recommendations and considerations for evaluating non-EATS modalities are proposed. Moving forward, improved understanding of the non-EATS modalities will lead to integrated testing strategies that can be used in regulatory bodies to protect environmental, animal, and human health from harmful environmental chemicals.