Search

Abstract Background Involving stroke patients in clinical research through patient engagement aims to ensure that studies are patient-centered, and may help ensure they are feasible, ethical, and credible, ultimately leading to enhanced trust and communication between researchers and the patient community. In this study, we have conducted a scoping review to identify existing evidence and gaps in SPSE. Methods The five-step approach outlined by Arksey and O’Malley, in conjunction with the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, provided the structure for this review. To find relevant articles, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases up to February 2024. Additionally, the review team conducted a hand search using Google Scholar, key journals, and references of highly relevant articles. Reviewers screened articles, selecting eligible English-language ones with available full texts, and extracted data from them into a pre-designed table tested by the research team. Result Of the 1002 articles initially identified, 21 proved eligible. Stakeholder engagement primarily occurred during the design phase of studies and within the studies using qualitative methodologies. Although the engagement of stakeholders in the research process is increasing, practice regarding terminology and principles of implementation remains variable. Researchers have recognized the benefits of stakeholder engagement, but have also faced numerous challenges that often arise during the research process. Conclusion The current study identifies stakeholder groups and the benefits and challenges researchers face in implementing their engagement. Given existing challenges and limited specific models or frameworks, it is suggested to explore applied recommendations for stakeholder engagement in future studies, that may enhance stakeholder engagement, overcome obstacles, and unify researchers’ understanding of engagement and implementation.

Abstract This protocol describes a systematic scoping review of Stroke Patient and Stakeholder Engagement (SPSE), concepts, definitions, models, implementation strategies, indicators, or frameworks. The active engagement of patients and other stakeholders is increasingly acknowledged as essential to patient-centered research to answer questions of importance to patients and their caregivers. Stroke is a debilitating, long-lasting burden for individuals, their families, and healthcare professionals. They require rehabilitation services, health care system assistance, and social support. Their difficulties are unique and require the continued involvement of all parties involved. Understanding SPSE in research is fundamental to healthcare planning and extends the role of patients and stakeholders beyond that of the study subject. We will conduct a systematic literature search to identify the types of existing evidence related to SPSE, implementation strategies, indicators, or frameworks related to Patient and Stakeholder Engagement (PSE); clarify key concepts, definitions, and components of SPSE; compile experiences and prerequisites; and identify stroke research internationally. Two independent reviewers will extract data from selected studies onto a customized extraction form that has already been piloted. We integrate existing knowledge to address gaps in the literature on SPSE research by presenting the model, implementation strategies, indicators, and frameworks for stroke patients. We hope that these findings will offer future researchers a clear picture and conceptual model of SPSE.

Abstract Clinical translation from bench to bedside often remains challenging even despite promising preclinical evidence. Among many drivers like biological complexity or poorly understood disease pathology, preclinical evidence often lacks desired robustness. Reasons include low sample sizes, selective reporting, publication bias, and consequently inflated effect sizes. In this context, there is growing consensus that confirmatory multicenter studies -by weeding out false positives- represent an important step in strengthening and generating preclinical evidence before moving on to clinical research. However, there is little guidance on what such a preclinical confirmatory study entails and when it should be conducted in the research trajectory. To close this gap, we organized a workshop to bring together statisticians, clinicians, preclinical scientists, and meta-researcher to discuss and develop recommendations that are solution-oriented and feasible for practitioners. Herein, we summarize and review current approaches and outline strategies that provide decision-critical guidance on when to start and subsequently how to plan a confirmatory study. We define a set of minimum criteria and strategies to strengthen validity before engaging in a confirmatory preclinical trial, including sample size considerations that take the inherent uncertainty of initial (exploratory) studies into account. Beyond this specific guidance, we highlight knowledge gaps that require further research and discuss the role of confirmatory studies in translational biomedical research. In conclusion, this workshop report highlights the need for close interaction and open and honest debate between statisticians, preclinical scientists, meta-researchers (that conduct research on research), and clinicians already at an early stage of a given preclinical research trajectory.

The state of open science needs to be monitored to track changes over time and identify areas to create interventions to drive improvements. In order to monitor open science practices, they first need to be well defined and operationalized. To reach consensus on what open science practices to monitor at biomedical research institutions, we conducted a modified 3-round Delphi study. Participants were research administrators, researchers, specialists in dedicated open science roles, and librarians. In rounds 1 and 2, participants completed an online survey evaluating a set of potential open science practices, and for round 3, we hosted two half-day virtual meetings to discuss and vote on items that had not reached consensus. Ultimately, participants reached consensus on 19 open science practices. This core set of open science practices will form the foundation for institutional dashboards and may also be of value for the development of policy, education, and interventions.

Abstract A spectre is haunting biomedical research: It appears that a substantial fraction of published research results cannot be reproduced, while spectacularly successful novel treatments developed in experimental models of disease too often fail in clinical trials. A reproducibility crisis has been proclaimed, and bench‐to‐bedside translation appears to be lost in a “valley of death”. Both predicaments, non‐reproducibility and translational roadblocks, are connected: Why should we expect to successfully “trans‐late” results to humans, if already “cis‐lation”—that is, the generalization from one experimental setting to an identical or fairly similar one—often fails?

Abstract Recently, several genome-wide association studies identified PHACTR1 as key locus for five diverse vascular disorders: coronary artery disease, migraine, fibromuscular dysplasia, cervical artery dissection and hypertension. Although these represent significant risk factors or comorbidities for ischemic stroke, PHACTR1 role in brain small vessel ischemic disease and ischemic stroke most important survival mechanism, such as the recruitment of brain collateral arteries like posterior communicating arteries (PcomAs), remains unknown. Therefore, we applied exome and genome sequencing in a multi-ethnic cohort of 180 early-onset independent familial and apparently sporadic brain small vessel ischemic disease and CADASIL-like Caucasian patients from US, Portugal, Finland, Serbia and Turkey and in 2 C57BL/6J stroke mouse models (bilateral common carotid artery stenosis [BCCAS] and middle cerebral artery occlusion [MCAO]), characterized by different degrees of PcomAs patency. We report 3 very rare coding variants in the small vessel ischemic disease-CADASIL-like cohort (p.Glu198Gln, p.Arg204Gly, p.Val251Leu) and a stop-gain mutation (p.Gln273*) in one MCAO mouse. These coding variants do not cluster in PHACTR1 known pathogenic domains and are not likely to play a critical role in small vessel ischemic disease or brain collateral circulation. We also exclude the possibility that copy number variants (CNVs) or a variant enrichment in Phactr1 may be associated with PcomA recruitment in BCCAS mice or linked to diverse vascular traits (cerebral blood flow pre-surgery, PcomA size, leptomeningeal microcollateral length and junction density during brain hypoperfusion) in C57BL/6J mice, respectively. Genetic variability in PHACTR1 is not likely to be a common susceptibility factor influencing small vessel ischemic disease in patients and PcomA recruitment in C57BL/6J mice. Nonetheless, rare variants in PHACTR1 RPEL domains may influence the stroke outcome and are worth investigating in a larger cohort of small vessel ischemic disease patients, different ischemic stroke subtypes and with functional studies.

Abstract Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the “ARRIVE Essential 10,” which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the “Recommended Set,” which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.

AimsCarotid artery disease is frequent and can result in chronic modest hypoperfusion of the brain. If no transient ischemic attack or stroke occur, it is classified asymptomatic. In the long-term, though, it can lead to cognitive impairment. Fostering cerebral remodeling after carotid artery occlusion might be a new concept of treatment. Paracrine Interleukin 6 (IL-6) can induce such remodeling processes at early stages. However, it has neurodegenerative long-term effects. With this exploratory study, we investigated the effect of paracrine IL-6 on cerebral remodeling in early stages after asymptomatic carotid artery occlusion to identify new treatment targets.Methods and ResultsTo mimic a human asymptomatic carotid artery disease, we used a mouse model of unilateral common carotid artery (CCA) occlusion. We developed a mouse model for inducible paracrine cerebral IL-6 expression (Cx30-Cre-ERT2;FLEX-IL6) and induced IL-6 2 days after CCA occlusion. We studied the effects of paracrine IL-6 after CCA occlusion on neuronal connectivity using diffusion tensor imaging and on local proteome regulations of the hypo-perfused striatum and contralateral motor cortex using mass spectrometry of laser capture micro-dissected tissues. Paracrine IL-6 induced cerebral remodeling leading to increased inter-hemispheric connectivity and changes in motor system connectivity. We identified changes in local protein abundance which might have adverse effects on functional outcome such as upregulation of Synuclein gamma (Sncg) or downregulation of Proline Dehydrogenase 1 (Prodh). However, we also identified changes in local protein abundance having potentially beneficial effects such as upregulation of Caprin1 or downregulation of GABA transporter 1 (Gat1).ConclusionsParacrine cerebral IL-6 at early stages induces changes in motor system connectivity and the proteome after asymptomatic CCA occlusion. Our results may help to distinguish unfavorable from beneficial IL-6 dependent protein regulations. Focusing on these targets might generate new treatments to improve long-term outcome in patients with carotid artery disease.

While high risk of failure is an inherent part of developing innovative therapies, it can be reduced by adherence to evidence-based rigorous research practices. Supported through the European Union’s Innovative Medicines Initiative, the EQIPD consortium has developed a novel preclinical research quality system that can be applied in both public and private sectors and is free for anyone to use. The EQIPD Quality System was designed to be suited to boost innovation by ensuring the generation of robust and reliable preclinical data while being lean, effective and not becoming a burden that could negatively impact the freedom to explore scientific questions. EQIPD defines research quality as the extent to which research data are fit for their intended use. Fitness, in this context, is defined by the stakeholders, who are the scientists directly involved in the research, but also their funders, sponsors, publishers, research tool manufacturers, and collaboration partners such as peers in a multi-site research project. The essence of the EQIPD Quality System is the set of 18 core requirements that can be addressed flexibly, according to user-specific needs and following a user-defined trajectory. The EQIPD Quality System proposes guidance on expectations for quality-related measures, defines criteria for adequate processes (i.e. performance standards) and provides examples of how such measures can be developed and implemented. However, it does not prescribe any pre-determined solutions. EQIPD has also developed tools (for optional use) to support users in implementing the system and assessment services for those research units that successfully implement the quality system and seek formal accreditation. Building upon the feedback from users and continuous improvement, a sustainable EQIPD Quality System will ultimately serve the entire community of scientists conducting non-regulated preclinical research, by helping them generate reliable data that are fit for their intended use.

In this response to Labib and Evans, authors of the Hong Kong Principles look forward to collaborating with those from the broad research integrity community to ensure that issues of equity, diversity and inclusion will become part of the ecosystem of research integrity.

The purpose of preclinical research is to inform the development of novel diagnostics or therapeutics, and the results of experiments on animal models of disease often inform the decision to conduct studies in humans. However, a substantial number of clinical trials fail, even when preclinical studies have apparently demonstrated the efficacy of a given intervention. A number of large-scale replication studies are currently trying to identify the factors that influence the robustness of preclinical research. Here, we discuss replications in the context of preclinical research trajectories, and argue that increasing validity should be a priority when selecting experiments to replicate and when performing the replication. We conclude that systematically improving three domains of validity – internal, external and translational – will result in a more efficient allocation of resources, will be more ethical, and will ultimately increase the chances of successful translation.

Background: Never before have clinical trials drawn as much public attention as those testing interventions for COVID-19. We aimed to describe the worldwide COVID-19 clinical research response and its evolution over the first 100 days of the pandemic. Methods: Descriptive analysis of planned, ongoing or completed trials by April 9, 2020 testing any intervention to treat or prevent COVID-19, systematically identified in trial registries, preprint servers, and literature databases. A survey was conducted of all trials to assess their recruitment status up to July 6, 2020. Results: Most of the 689 trials (overall target sample size 396,366) were small (median sample size 120; interquartile range [IQR] 60-300) but randomized (75.8%; n=522) and were often conducted in China (51.1%; n=352) or the USA (11%; n=76). 525 trials (76.2%) planned to include 155,571 hospitalized patients, and 25 (3.6%) planned to include 96,821 health-care workers. Treatments were evaluated in 607 trials (88.1%), frequently antivirals (n=144) or antimalarials (n=112); 78 trials (11.3%) focused on prevention, including 14 vaccine trials. No trial investigated social distancing. Interventions tested in 11 trials with >5,000 participants were also tested in 169 smaller trials (median sample size 273; IQR 90-700). Hydroxychloroquine alone was investigated in 110 trials. While 414 trials (60.0%) expected completion in 2020, only 35 trials (4.1%; 3,071 participants) were completed by July 6. Of 112 trials with detailed recruitment information, 55 had recruited Conclusions: The size and speed of the COVID-19 clinical trials agenda is unprecedented. However, most trials were small investigating a small fraction of treatment options. The feasibility of this research agenda is questionable, and many trials may end in futility, wasting research resources. Much better coordination is needed to respond to global health threats.

Background: Never before have clinical trials drawn as much public attention as those testing interventions for COVID-19. We aimed to describe the worldwide COVID-19 clinical research response and its evolution over the first 100 days of the pandemic. Methods: Descriptive analysis of planned, ongoing or completed trials by April 9, 2020 testing any intervention to treat or prevent COVID-19, systematically identified in trial registries, preprint servers, and literature databases. A survey was conducted of all trials to assess their recruitment status up to July 6, 2020. Results: Most of the 689 trials (overall target sample size 396,366) were small (median sample size 120; interquartile range [IQR] 60-300) but randomized (75.8%; n=522) and were often conducted in China (51.1%; n=352) or the USA (11%; n=76). 525 trials (76.2%) planned to include 155,571 hospitalized patients, and 25 (3.6%) planned to include 96,821 health-care workers. Treatments were evaluated in 607 trials (88.1%), frequently antivirals (n=144) or antimalarials (n=112); 78 trials (11.3%) focused on prevention, including 14 vaccine trials. No trial investigated social distancing. Interventions tested in 11 trials with >5,000 participants were also tested in 169 smaller trials (median sample size 273; IQR 90-700). Hydroxychloroquine alone was investigated in 110 trials. While 414 trials (60.0%) expected completion in 2020, only 35 trials (4.1%; 3,071 participants) were completed by July 6. Of 112 trials with detailed recruitment information, 55 had recruited Conclusions: The size and speed of the COVID-19 clinical trials agenda is unprecedented. However, most trials were small investigating a small fraction of treatment options. The feasibility of this research agenda is questionable, and many trials may end in futility, wasting research resources. Much better coordination is needed to respond to global health threats.

Numerous studies on experimental ischemic stroke use the filament middle cerebral artery occlusion (fMCAo) model in C57BL/6 mice, but lesion sizes in this strain are highly variable. A known contributor is variation in the posterior communicating artery (PcomA) patency. We therefore aimed to provide a semiquantitative non-invasive in vivo method to routinely assess PcomA patency. We included 43 male C57BL/6 mice from four independent studies using a transient 45 min fMCAo model. Edema-corrected lesion sizes were measured by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging 24 h after reperfusion. Time-of-flight MR angiography was performed 7 days before and 24 h after fMCAo. Scores of PcomA size measured 24 h after, but not scores measured 7 days before fMCAo were negatively correlated with lesion size. Variability in PcomA patency explained 30% of the variance in our cohort (p < 0.0001, coefficient of determination r2 = 0.3). In a simulation using parameters typical for experimental stroke research, the power to detect a true effect of d = 1 between two groups increased by 15% when an according covariate was included in the statistical model. We have demonstrated that in vivo measurement of PcomA size is feasible and can lead to increased accuracy in assessing the effect of treatments.

Improving the reproducibility of biomedical research is a major challenge. Transparent and accurate reporting is vital to this process; it allows readers to assess the reliability of the findings and repeat or build upon the work of other researchers. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) were developed in 2010 to help authors and journals identify the minimum information necessary to report in publications describing in vivo experiments. Despite widespread endorsement by the scientific community, the impact of ARRIVE on the transparency of reporting in animal research publications has been limited. We have revised the ARRIVE guidelines to update them and facilitate their use in practice. The revised guidelines are published alongside this paper. This explanation and elaboration document was developed as part of the revision. It provides further information about each of the 21 items in ARRIVE 2.0, including the rationale and supporting evidence for their inclusion in the guidelines, elaboration of details to report, and examples of good reporting from the published literature. This document also covers advice and best practice in the design and conduct of animal studies to support researchers in improving standards from the start of the experimental design process through to publication.

For knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous, and transparent at all stages of design, execution, and reporting. Assessment of researchers still rarely includes considerations related to trustworthiness, rigor, and transparency. We have developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) as part of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behaviors that strengthen research integrity. We present five principles: responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity. For each principle, we provide a rationale for its inclusion and provide examples where these principles are already being adopted.

Preregistration of study protocols and, in particular, Registered Reports are novel publishing formats that are currently gaining substantial traction. Besides rating the research question and soundness of methodology over outstanding significance of the results, they can help with antagonizing inadequate statistical power, selective reporting of results, undisclosed analytic flexibility, as well as publication bias. Preregistration works well when a clear hypothesis, primary outcome, and mode of analysis can be formulated. But is it also applicable and useful in discovery research, which develops theories and hypotheses, measurement techniques, and generates evidence that justifies further research? I will argue that only slight modifications are needed to harness the potential of preregistration and make exploratory research more trustworthy and useful.

The reproducibility crisis triggered worldwide initiatives to improve rigor, reproducibility, and transparency in biomedical research. There are many examples of scientists, journals, and funding agencies adopting responsible research practices. The QUEST (Quality-Ethics-Open Science-Translation) Center offers a unique opportunity to examine the role of institutions. The Berlin Institute of Health founded QUEST to increase the likelihood that research conducted at this large academic medical center would be trustworthy, useful for scientists and society, and ethical. QUEST researchers perform "science of science" studies to understand problems with standard practices and develop targeted solutions. The staff work with institutional leadership and local scientists to incentivize and support responsible practices in research, funding, and hiring. Some activities described in this paper focus on the institution, whereas others may benefit the national and international scientific community. Our experience, approaches, and recommendations will be informative for faculty leadership, administrators, and researchers interested in improving scientific practice.

How much can we rely on whether what was reported in a study was actually done? Systematic and independent examination of records, documents and processes through audits are a central element of quality management systems. In the context of current concerns about the robustness and reproducibility of experimental biomedical research audits have been suggested as a remedy a number of times. However, audits are resource intense and time consuming, and due to their very nature may be perceived as inquisition. Consequently, there is very little experience or literature on auditing and assessments in the complex preclinical biomedical research environment. To gain some insight into which audit approaches might best suit biomedical research in academia, in this study we have applied a number of them in a typical academic neuroscience environment consisting of twelve research groups with about 100 researchers, students and technicians, utilizing the full gamut of state-of-the-art methodology. Several types of assessments and internal as well as external audits (including the novel format of a peer audit) were systematically explored by a team of quality management specialists. An experimental design template was developed (and is provided here) that takes into account and mitigates difficulties, risks and systematic errors that may occur during the course of a study. All audits were performed according to a pre-defined workflow developed by us. Outcomes were assessed qualitatively. We asked for feedback from participating employees in every final discussion of an audit and documented this in the audit reports. Based on these reports follow-up audits were improved. We conclude that several realistic options for auditing exist which have the potential to improve preclinical biomedical research in academia, and have listed specific recommendations regarding their benefits and provided practical resources for their implementation (e.g. study design and audit templates, audit workflow).

The need for replication of initial results has been rediscovered only recently in many fields of research. In preclinical biomedical research, it is common practice to conduct exact replications with the same sample sizes as those used in the initial experiments. Such replication attempts, however, have lower probability of replication than is generally appreciated. Indeed, in the common scenario of an effect just reaching statistical significance, the statistical power of the replication experiment assuming the same effect size is approximately 50%-in essence, a coin toss. Accordingly, we use the provocative analogy of "replicating" a neuroprotective drug animal study with a coin flip to highlight the need for larger sample sizes in replication experiments. Additionally, we provide detailed background for the probability of obtaining a significant p value in a replication experiment and discuss the variability of p values as well as pitfalls of simple binary significance testing in both initial preclinical experiments and replication studies with small sample sizes. We conclude that power analysis for determining the sample size for a replication study is obligatory within the currently dominant hypothesis testing framework. Moreover, publications should include effect size point estimates and corresponding measures of precision, e.g., confidence intervals, to allow readers to assess the magnitude and direction of reported effects and to potentially combine the results of initial and replication study later through Bayesian or meta-analytic approaches.

Background: Several meta-research studies and benchmarking activities have assessed how comprehensively and timely, academic institutions and private companies publish their clinical studies. These current “clinical trial tracking” activities differ substantially in how they sample relevant studies, and how they follow up on their publication. Methods: To allow informed policy and decision making on future publication assessment and benchmarking of institutions and companies, this paper outlines and discusses 10 variables that influence the tracking of timely publications. Tracking variables were initially selected by experts and by the authors through discussion. To validate the completeness of our set of variables, we conducted i) an explorative review of tracking studies and ii) an explorative tracking of registered clinical trials of three leading German university medical centres. Results: We identified the following 10 relevant variables impacting the tracking of clinical studies: 1) responsibility for clinical studies, 2) type and characteristics of clinical studies, 3) status of clinical studies, 4) source for sampling, 5) timing of registration, 6) determination of completion date, 7) timeliness of dissemination, 8) format of dissemination, 9) source for tracking, and 10) inter-rater reliability. Based on the description of these tracking variables and their influence, we discuss which variables could serve in what ways as a standard assessment of “timely publication”. Conclusions: To facilitate the tracking and consequent benchmarking of how often and how timely academic institutions and private companies publish clinical study results, we have two core recommendations. First, the improvement in the link between registration and publication, for example via institutional policies for academic institutions and private companies. Second, the comprehensive and transparent reporting of tracking studies according to the 10 variables presented in this paper.

Stroke is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. In addition to neuronal death resulting directly from energy depletion due to lack of blood supply, inflammation and microglial activation following ischemic brain injury has been increasingly recognized to be a key contributor to the pathophysiology of cerebrovascular disease. However, our understanding of the cross talk between the ischemic brain and the immune system is limited. Recently, we demonstrated that following focal ischemia, death of mature viable neurons can be executed through phagocytosis by microglial cells or recruited macrophages, i.e. through phagoptosis. It was shown that inhibition of phagocytic signaling pathways following endothelin-1 induced focal cerebral ischemia leads to increased neuronal survival and neurological recovery. This suggests that inhibition of specific phagocytic pathways may prevent neuronal death during cerebral ischemia. To further explore this potential therapeutic target, we propose to assess the role of phagocytosis in an established model of temporary (45min) middle cerebral artery occlusion (tMCAo), and to evaluate neuronal survival and neurological recovery in mice with deficient phagocytosis. The primary outcome of this study will be forelimb function assessed with the staircase test. Secondary outcomes constitute Rotarod performance, stroke volume (quantified on MR imaging or brain sections, respectively), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) connectome mapping, and histological analyses to measure neuronal and microglial densities, and phagocytic activity. Male mice aged 10-12 weeks will be used for experiments.

Background and Purpose: The gut communicates with the brain bidirectionally via neural, humoral and immune pathways. All these pathways are affected by acute brain lesions, such as stroke. Brain-gut communication may therefore impact on the overall outcome after CNS-injury. Until now, contradictory reports on intestinal function and translocation of gut bacteria after experimental stroke have been published. Accordingly, we aimed to specifically investigate the effects of transient focal cerebral ischemia on intestinal permeability, gut associated lymphoid tissue and bacterial translocation in an exploratory study using a well-characterized murine stroke model.Methods: After 60 min of middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) we assessed intestinal morphology (time points after surgery day 0, 3, 5, 14, 21) and tight junction protein expression (occludin and claudin-1 at day 1 and 3) in 12-week-old male C57Bl/6J mice. Lactulose/mannitol/sucralose test was performed to assess intestinal permeability 24–72 h after surgery. To investigate the influence of cerebral ischemia on the local immune system of the gut, main immune cell populations in Peyer's patches (PP) were quantified by flow cytometry. Finally, we evaluated bacterial translocation to extraintestinal organs 24 and 72 h after MCAO by microbiological culture and fluorescence in situ hybridization targeting bacterial 16S rRNA.Results: Transient MCAO decreased claudin-1 expression in the ileum but not in the colon. Intestinal morphology (assessed by light microscopy) and permeability did not change measurably after MCAO. After MCAO, animals had significantly fewer B cells in PP compared to naïve mice.Conclusions: In a murine model of stroke, which leads to large brain infarctions in the middle cerebral artery territory, we did not find evidence for overt alterations neither in gut morphology, barrier proteins and permeability nor presence of intestinal bacterial translocation.

Background: Several meta-research studies and benchmarking activities have assessed how comprehensively and timely, academic institutions and private companies publish their clinical studies. These current “clinical trial tracking” activities differ substantially in how they sample relevant studies, and how they follow up on their publication. Methods: To allow informed policy and decision making on future publication assessment and benchmarking of institutions and companies, this paper outlines and discusses 10 variables that influence the tracking of timely publications. Tracking variables were initially selected by experts and by the authors through discussion. To validate the completeness of our set of variables, we conducted i) an explorative review of tracking studies and ii) an explorative tracking of registered clinical trials of three leading German university medical centres. Results: We identified the following 10 relevant variables impacting the tracking of clinical studies: 1) responsibility for clinical studies, 2) type and characteristics of clinical studies, 3) status of clinical studies, 4) source for sampling, 5) timing of registration, 6) determination of completion date, 7) timeliness of dissemination, 8) format of dissemination, 9) source for tracking, and 10) inter-rater reliability. Based on the description of these tracking variables and their influence, we discuss which variables could serve in what ways as a standard assessment of “timely publication”. Conclusions: To facilitate the tracking and consequent benchmarking of how often and how timely academic institutions and private companies publish clinical study results, we have two core recommendations. First, the improvement in the link between registration and publication, for example via institutional policies for academic institutions and private companies. Second, the comprehensive and transparent reporting of tracking studies according to the 10 variables presented in this paper.

Millions of people worldwide currently suffer from serious neurological diseases and injuries for which there are few, and often no, effective treatments. The paucity of effective interventions is, no doubt, due in large part to the complexity of the disorders, as well as our currently limited understanding of their pathophysiology. The bleak picture for patients, however, is also attributable to avoidable impediments stemming from quality concerns in preclinical research that often escape detection by research regulation efforts. In our essay, we connect the dots between these concerns about the quality of preclinical research and their potential ethical impact on the patients who volunteer for early trials of interventions informed by it. We do so in hopes that a greater appreciation among preclinical researchers of these serious ethical consequences can lead to a greater commitment within the research community to adopt widely available tools and measures that can help to improve the quality of research.

Animal models of disease are an indispensable element in our quest to understand pathophysiology and develop novel therapies. Ex vivo studies have severe limitations, in particular their inability to study individual disease progression over time. In this respect, non-invasive in vivo technologies offer multiple advantages. We here used bilateral common carotid artery occlusion (BCCAO) in mice, an established model for ischemic retinopathy, and performed a multimodal in vivo and ex vivo follow-up. We used scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO), ocular coherence tomography (OCT) and electroretinography (ERG) over 6 weeks followed by ex vivo analyses. BCCAO leads to vascular remodeling with thickening of veins starting at 4 weeks, loss of photoreceptor synapses with concomitant reduced b-waves in the ERG and thinning of the retina. Mononuclear phagocytes showed fluctuation of activity over time. There was large inter-individual variation in the severity of neuronal degeneration and cellular inflammatory responses. Ex vivo analysis confirmed these variable features of vascular remodeling, neurodegeneration and inflammation. In summary, we conclude that multimodal follow-up and subgroup analysis of retinal changes in BCCAO further calls into question the use of ex vivo studies with distinct single end-points. We propose that our approach can foster the understanding of retinal disease as well as the clinical translation of emerging therapeutic strategies.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193961.].

Stroke is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. In addition to neuronal death resulting directly from energy depletion due to lack of blood supply, inflammation and microglial activation following ischemic brain injury has been increasingly recognized to be a key contributor to the pathophysiology of cerebrovascular disease. However, our understanding of the cross talk between the ischemic brain and the immune system is limited. Recently, we demonstrated that following focal ischemia, death of mature viable neurons can be executed through phagocytosis by microglial cells or recruited macrophages, i.e. through phagoptosis. It was shown that inhibition of phagocytic signaling pathways following endothelin-1 induced focal cerebral ischemia leads to increased neuronal survival and neurological recovery. This suggests that inhibition of specific phagocytic pathways may prevent neuronal death during cerebral ischemia. To further explore this potential therapeutic target, we propose to assess the role of phagocytosis in an established model of temporary (45min) middle cerebral artery occlusion (tMCAo), and to evaluate neuronal survival and neurological recovery in mice with deficient phagocytosis. The primary outcome of this study will be forelimb function assessed with the staircase test. Secondary outcomes constitute Rotarod performance, stroke volume (quantified on MR imaging or brain sections, respectively), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) connectome mapping, and histological analyses to measure neuronal and microglial densities, and phagocytic activity. Male mice aged 10-12 weeks will be used for experiments.

Stroke is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. In addition to neuronal death resulting directly from energy depletion due to lack of blood supply, inflammation and microglial activation following ischemic brain injury has been increasingly recognized to be a key contributor to the pathophysiology of cerebrovascular disease. However, our understanding of the cross talk between the ischemic brain and the immune system is limited. Recently, we demonstrated that following focal ischemia, death of mature viable neurons can be executed through phagocytosis by microglial cells or recruited macrophages, i.e. through phagoptosis. It was shown that inhibition of phagocytic signaling pathways following endothelin-1 induced focal cerebral ischemia leads to increased neuronal survival and neurological recovery. This suggests that inhibition of specific phagocytic pathways may prevent neuronal death during cerebral ischemia. To further explore this potential therapeutic target, we propose to assess the role of phagocytosis in an established model of temporary (45min) middle cerebral artery occlusion, and to evaluate neuronal survival and neurological recovery in mice with deficient phagocytosis.

Despite the potential benefits of sequential designs, studies evaluating treatments or experimental manipulations in preclinical experimental biomedicine almost exclusively use classical block designs. Our aim with this article is to bring the existing methodology of group sequential designs to the attention of researchers in the preclinical field and to clearly illustrate its potential utility. Group sequential designs can offer higher efficiency than traditional methods and are increasingly used in clinical trials. Using simulation of data, we demonstrate that group sequential designs have the potential to improve the efficiency of experimental studies, even when sample sizes are very small, as is currently prevalent in preclinical experimental biomedicine. When simulating data with a large effect size of d = 1 and a sample size of n = 18 per group, sequential frequentist analysis consumes in the long run only around 80% of the planned number of experimental units. In larger trials (n = 36 per group), additional stopping rules for futility lead to the saving of resources of up to 30% compared to block designs. We argue that these savings should be invested to increase sample sizes and hence power, since the currently underpowered experiments in preclinical biomedicine are a major threat to the value and predictiveness in this research domain.

Every professional doing active research in the life sciences is required to keep a laboratory notebook. However, while science has changed dramatically over the last centuries, laboratory notebooks have remained essentially unchanged since pre-modern science. We argue that the implementation of electronic laboratory notebooks (eLN) in academic research is overdue, and we provide researchers and their institutions with the background and practical knowledge to select and initiate the implementation of an eLN in their laboratories. In addition, we present data from surveying biomedical researchers and technicians regarding which hypothetical features and functionalities they hope to see implemented in an eLN, and which ones they regard as less important. We also present data on acceptance and satisfaction of those who have recently switched from paper laboratory notebook to an eLN. We thus provide answers to the following questions: What does an electronic laboratory notebook afford a biomedical researcher, what does it require, and how should one go about implementing it?

We here propose the implementation of a simple and effective method to enhance the quality of basic and preclinical academic research: critical incident reporting (CIR). CIR has become a standard in clinical medicine but to our knowledge has never been implemented in the context of academic basic research. We provide a simple, free, open-source software tool for implementing a CIR system in research groups, laboratories, or large institutions (LabCIRS). LabCIRS was developed, tested, and implemented in our multidisciplinary and multiprofessional neuroscience research department. It is accepted by all members of the department, has led to the emergence of a mature error culture, and has made the laboratory a safer and more communicative environment. Initial concerns that implementation of such a measure might lead to a "surveillance culture" that would stifle scientific creativity turned out to be unfounded.

Olfactory ensheathing cell (OEC) transplantation is a candidate cellular treatment approach for human spinal cord injury (SCI) due to their unique regenerative potential and autologous origin. The objective of this study was, through a meta-epidemiologic approach, (i) to assess the efficacy of OEC transplantation on locomotor recovery after traumatic experimental SCI and (ii) to estimate the likelihood of reporting bias and/or missing data. A study protocol was finalized before data collection. Embedded into a systematic review and meta-analysis, we conducted a literature research of databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science from 1949/01 to 2014/10 with no language restrictions, screened by two independent investigators. Studies were included if they assessed neurobehavioral improvement after traumatic experimental SCI, administrated no combined interventions, and reported the number of animals in the treatment and control group. Individual effect sizes were pooled using a random effects model. Details regarding the study design were extracted and impact of these on locomotor outcome was assessed by meta-regression. Missing data (reporting bias) was determined by Egger regression and Funnel-plotting. The primary study outcome assessed was improvement in locomotor function at the final time point of measurement. We included 49 studies (62 experiments, 1,164 animals) in the final analysis. The overall improvement in locomotor function after OEC transplantation, measured using the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) score, was 20.3% (95% CI 17.8-29.5). One missing study was imputed by trim and fill analysis, suggesting only slight publication bias and reducing the overall effect to a 19.2% improvement of locomotor activity. Dose-response ratio supports neurobiological plausibility. Studies were assessed using a 9-point item quality score, resulting in a median score of 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-5). In conclusion, OEC transplantation exerts considerable beneficial effects on neurobehavioral recovery after traumatic experimental SCI. Publication bias was minimal and affirms the translational potential of efficacy, but safety cannot be adequately assessed. The data justify OECs as a cellular substrate to develop and optimize minimally invasive and safe cellular transplantation paradigms for the lesioned spinal cord embedded into state-of-the-art Phase I/II clinical trial design studies for human SCI.

Given small sample sizes, loss of animals in preclinical experiments can dramatically alter results. However, effects of attrition on distortion of results are unknown. We used a simulation study to analyze the effects of random and biased attrition. As expected, random loss of samples decreased statistical power, but biased removal, including that of outliers, dramatically increased probability of false positive results. Next, we performed a meta-analysis of animal reporting and attrition in stroke and cancer. Most papers did not adequately report attrition, and extrapolating from the results of the simulation data, we suggest that their effect sizes were likely overestimated.

Every professional doing active research in the life sciences is required to keep a laboratory notebook. However, while science has changed dramatically over the last centuries, laboratory notebooks have remained essentially unchanged since pre-modern science. We argue that the implementation of electronic laboratory notebooks (eLN) in academic research is overdue, and we provide researchers and their institutions with the background and practical knowledge to select and initiate the implementation of an eLN in their laboratories. In addition, we present data from surveying biomedical researchers and technicians regarding which hypothetical features and functionalities they hope to see implemented in an eLN, and which ones they regard as less important. We also present data on acceptance and satisfaction of those who have recently switched from paper laboratory notebook to an eLN. We thus provide answers to the following questions: What does an electronic laboratory notebook afford a biomedical researcher, what does it require, and how should one go about implementing it?