University of California, San Francisco

About: University of California, San Francisco is a education organization based out in San Francisco, California, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 83381 authors who have published 186236 publications receiving 12068420 citations. The organization is also known as: UCSF & UC San Francisco.

CRISPR-Cas12a target binding unleashes indiscriminate single-stranded DNase activity

Abstract: CRISPR-Cas12a (Cpf1) proteins are RNA-guided enzymes that bind and cut DNA as components of bacterial adaptive immune systems Like CRISPR-Cas9, Cas12a has been harnessed for genome editing on the basis of its ability to generate targeted, double-stranded DNA breaks Here we show that RNA-guided DNA binding unleashes indiscriminate single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) cleavage activity by Cas12a that completely degrades ssDNA molecules We find that target-activated, nonspecific single-stranded deoxyribonuclease (ssDNase) cleavage is also a property of other type V CRISPR-Cas12 enzymes By combining Cas12a ssDNase activation with isothermal amplification, we create a method termed DNA endonuclease-targeted CRISPR trans reporter (DETECTR), which achieves attomolar sensitivity for DNA detection DETECTR enables rapid and specific detection of human papillomavirus in patient samples, thereby providing a simple platform for molecular diagnostics

Results of a Prospective Study of Acute Liver Failure at 17 Tertiary Care Centers in the United States

Abstract: Acetaminophen overdose and idiosyncratic drug reactions have replaced viral hepatitis as the most frequent causes of acute liver failure. The cause of liver failure and coma grade at admission were...

HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders persist in the era of potent antiretroviral therapy: CHARTER Study.

Abstract: Objectives: This is a cross-sectional, observational study to determine the frequency and associated features of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) in a large, diverse sample of infected individuals in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy (CART). Methods: A total of 1,555 HIV-infected adults were recruited from 6 university clinics across the United States, with minimal exclusions. We used standardized neuromedical, psychiatric, and neuropsychological (NP) examinations, and recently published criteria for diagnosing HAND and classifying 3 levels of comorbidity (minimal to severe non-HIV risks for NP impairment). Results: Fifty-two percent of the total sample had NP impairment, with higher rates in groups with greater comorbidity burden (40%, 59%, and 83%). Prevalence estimates for specific HAND diagnoses (excluding severely confounded cases) were 33% for asymptomatic neurocognitive impairment, 12% for mild neurocognitive disorder, and only 2% for HIV-associated dementia (HAD). Among participants with minimal comorbidities (n 843), history of low nadir CD4 was a strong predictor of impairment, and the lowest impairment rate on CART occurred in the subset with suppressed plasma viral loads and nadir CD4 200 cells/mm 3 (30% vs 47% in remaining subgroups). Conclusions: The most severe HAND diagnosis (HAD) was rare, but milder forms of impairment remained common, even among those receiving CART who had minimal comorbidities. Future studies should clarify whether early disease events (e.g., profound CD4 decline) may trigger chronic CNS changes, and whether early CART prevents or reverses these changes. Neurology ®

Socioeconomic status in health research: one size does not fit all.

Abstract: Problems with measuring socioeconomic status (SES)—frequently included in clinical and public health studies as a control variable and less frequently as the variable(s) of main interest—could affect research findings and conclusions, with implications for practice and policy.Wecritically examine standard SES measurement approaches, illustrating problems with examples from new analyses and the literature. For example, marked racial/ethnic differences in income at a given educational level and in wealth at a given income level raise questions about the socioeconomic comparability of individuals who are similar on education or income alone. Evidence also shows that conclusions about nonsocioeconomic causes of racial/ethnic differences in health may depend on the measure—eg, income, wealth, education, occupation, neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics, or past socioeconomic experiences—used to “control for SES,” suggesting that findings from studies that have measured limited aspects of SES should be reassessed. We recommend an outcome- and social group–specific approach to SES measurement that involves (1) considering plausible explanatory pathways and mechanisms, (2) measuring as much relevant socioeconomic information as possible, (3) specifying the particular socioeconomic factors measured (rather than SES overall), and (4) systematically considering how potentially important unmeasured socioeconomic factors may affect conclusions. Better SES measures are needed in data sources, but improvements could be made by using existing information more thoughtfully and acknowledging its limitations.