Citations

Deregulated inflammatory signaling via STAT family transcription factors, particularly STAT1, underlies a variety of immune-related diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease. Whereas activation of STATs by JAKs via canonical receptor-driven JAK–STAT signaling is well understood, little is known about JAK-independent mechanisms of STAT activation. Here, we identify the understudied nonreceptor tyrosine kinase TNK1 as a therapeutically targetable, JAK-independent activator of STAT signaling. Using a multiomics approach, we mapped a network of TNK1 substrates associated with protein condensates and proinflammatory signaling, including STAT1. We found that TNK1, but not its sister kinase ACK1, directly phosphorylates STATs at well described STAT-activating JAK sites. In cells, TNK1-mediated STAT1 phosphorylation and activation occurs independently of JAKs. Imaging and interactomics data suggest that TNK1 interacts with STAT1 in cytosolic condensates, which likely compartmentalize TNK1-substrate interactions. We show that an intrinsically disordered proline-rich region in TNK1, which includes a 14-3-3 docking phosphorylation site, is required for the formation of kinase-active TNK1 condensates and STAT1 phosphorylation. Mutations within the proline-rich region that eliminate 14-3-3 binding increase formation of TNK1 condensates, suggesting a model in which 14-3-3 acts as a clamp that constrains the flexible PRR to inhibit condensate formation and STAT1 activation. Finally, we show that TNK1 is a targetable driver of STAT1-mediated inflammation in the gut as inhibition of TNK1 reduces active STAT1 in the colon and ameliorates colitis symptoms in mice.

Importance The effect of cornea donor diabetes on endothelial cell density (ECD) and morphometry after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is not known. Objective To determine whether endothelial cell loss (ECL) and morphometric changes 1 year after successful DMEK are related to cornea donor’s diabetes status. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 2022 to July 2024 at 28 US clinical sites (46 surgeons) and 13 eye banks. Included in the trial were the eyes of recipients (some of whom received tissue from donors without diabetes and others who received tissue from donors with diabetes) who underwent successful DMEK, primarily for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy, and had at least 1 analyzable postoperative endothelial image. Intervention DMEK performed with a cornea from a donor without or with diabetes, assigned using a minimization procedure to achieve an approximate 2:1 distribution. Main Outcomes and Measures ECD, ECL, coefficient of variation in cell area (CV), and percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX) at 1 year from eye bank and postoperative specular central endothelial images. Results A total 1274 eyes of 982 recipients (mean [SD] age, 70 [8] years; 569 female [57.9%]; 816 [64.1%] with tissue from donors without diabetes and 458 [35.9%] with tissue from donors with diabetes) were included in the study. Preoperatively, mean (SD) central ECD in tissue from donors without diabetes and with diabetes were 2676 (290) cells/mm 2 and 2671 (286) cells/mm 2 , respectively. At 1 year, mean (SD) ECL was 28.3% (16.1%) and 28.0% (17.0%), in the donor groups without and with diabetes, respectively (adjusted mean difference = −0.4%; 95% CI, −2.3% to 1.4%), resulting in a mean (SD) 1-year ECD of 1927 (498) cells/mm 2 and 1920 (496) cells/mm 2 , respectively (adjusted mean difference = 10 cells/mm 2 ; 95% CI, −36 to 56; P = .95). No difference in ECD at 1 year associated with diabetes severity was noted ( P = .97). Mean (SD) CV did not differ at 1 year between the 2 groups of eyes (31.5% [4.1%] vs 31.4% [4.1%]; adjusted mean difference = −0.4%; 95% CI, −0.9% to 0.1%; P = .51), and mean (SD) HEX did not differ at 1 year between the 2 groups of eyes (57.7% [5.8%] vs 57.2% [5.8%]; adjusted mean difference = 0.1%, 95% CI, −0.8% to 0.9%; P = .33). Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found that ECL and morphometry 1 year after DMEK were not affected by cornea donor diabetes status. With comparable 1-year graft success with tissue from donors with and without diabetes demonstrated in this trial, these findings support the use of corneas from donors with diabetes for endothelial keratoplasty procedures. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05134480

Importance If the success of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is not affected by whether the donor has diabetes, then the donor pool should expand. Objective To determine whether the 1-year DMEK success rate is affected by the presence of diabetes in the donor. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 2022 to July 2025 at 28 clinical sites (46 surgeons), with donor corneas provided by 13 eye banks in the US. Included in the study were individuals undergoing low to moderate risk DMEK (95% for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy). Study data were analyzed from April to September 2025. Intervention DMEK performed with a cornea from a donor without or with diabetes, assigned using a minimization procedure (comparable with randomization) to achieve an approximate 2:1 distribution, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures Graft success at 1 year Results A total of 1097 individuals (1421 study eyes; median [IQR] age, 71 [66-76] years; 631 female [57.5%]) were included in the study. The 1-year cumulative probability of graft success was 96.3% (95% CI, 95.0%-97.5%) among 912 study eyes (64.2%) receiving tissue from donors without diabetes and 97.1% (95% CI, 95.5%-98.4%) among 509 study eyes (35.8%) receiving tissue from donors with diabetes (difference between groups = 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, −1.2 to 2.6; P = .63). The 1-year cumulative probability of graft success was 96.5% (95% CI, 93.6%-98.9%) in the mild donor diabetes severity subgroup (n = 173) and 97.3% (95% CI, 95.4%-98.8%) in the moderate to severe donor diabetes severity subgroup (n = 336), using a diabetes severity rating scale based on medical history. The rates of primary donor failure, early failure related to surgical complications, and subsequent failure were as follows: 2.5% (23 of 912), 0.7% (6 of 912), and 0.3% (3 of 912), respectively, in recipients of tissue from a donor without diabetes, and 2.6% (13 of 509), 0.4% (2 of 509), and 0%, respectively, among recipients of tissue from a donor with diabetes. There were no failures due to graft rejection. Conclusions and Relevance The 1-year success rate in eyes undergoing DMEK with successfully prepared tissue was very high regardless of donor diabetes status. These results, supported by the separately reported finding that endothelial cell loss and cornea morphometry after 1 year were not affected by donor diabetes status, provide strong support for having no restrictions on the use of tissue from donors with diabetes for DMEK. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05134480

AbstractAlthough studies suggest that patients with limited health literacy and/or low numeracy skills may stand to gain the most from shared decision making (SDM), the impact of these conditions on the effective implementation of SDM in the emergency department (ED) is not well understood. In this article from the proceedings of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference on Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department we discuss knowledge gaps identified and propose consensus‐driven research priorities to help guide future work to improve SDM for this patient population in the ED.

AbstractFor many people the emergency department (ED) is the first point of access to healthcare for acute needs and a recurring location for many with chronic healthcare needs. While the ED is well placed to identify unmet needs it can also be a net that people slip through when faced with uncoordinated and expensive healthcare challenges. Thus the ED has a responsibility to set patients on a safe and meaningful care trajectory, which can only be done in consultation and partnership with the patients themselves. The purpose of this article is to present crucial aspects of patient engagement that are essential for future research to foster an environment of colearning and respect that encourages ongoing involvement by patients, families, and staff.

Objective Pancreatic cysts are commonly detected in patients undergoing pancreatic imaging. Better approaches are needed to characterise these lesions. In this study we evaluated the utility of detecting mutant DNA in secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice. Design Secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice was collected from the duodenum of 291 subjects enrolled in Cancer of the Pancreas Screening trials at five US academic medical centres. The study population included subjects with a familial predisposition to pancreatic cancer who underwent pancreatic screening, and disease controls with normal pancreata, chronic pancreatitis, sporadic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) or other neoplasms. Somatic GNAS mutations (reported prevalence ∼66% of IPMNs) were measured using digital high-resolution melt-curve analysis and pyrosequencing. Results GNAS mutations were detected in secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice samples of 50 of 78 familial and sporadic cases of IPMN(s) (64.1%), 15 of 33 (45.5%) with only diminutive cysts (<5 mm), but none of 57 disease controls. GNAS mutations were also detected in five of 123 screened subjects without a pancreatic cyst. Among 97 subjects who had serial pancreatic evaluations, GNAS mutations detected in baseline juice samples predicted subsequent emergence or increasing size of pancreatic cysts. Conclusion Duodenal collections of secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice from patients with IPMNs have a similar prevalence of mutant GNAS to primary IPMNs, indicating that these samples are an excellent source of mutant DNA from the pancreas. The detection of GNAS mutations before an IPMN is visible suggests that analysis of pancreatic juice has the potential to help in the risk stratification and surveillance of patients undergoing pancreatic screening.