Kallmann syndrome: a hystorical, clinical and molecular review

Kallmann syndrome (KS), the association of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and anosmia, was described by Maestre de San Juan in 1856 and characterized as a hereditary condition by Franz Josef Kallmann in 1944. Many aspects such as pathogeny, phenotype and genotype in KS were described in the last fifteen years. The knowledge of this condition has grown fast, making it difficult to update. Here we review historical aspects of this condition and its discoverers and describe new findings regarding the embryogenesis of the olfactory bulb and GnRH secreting neuronal tracts that are important for understanding the association of hypogonadism and anosmia. Additionally, we describe the phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of KS, including five related genes (KAL-1, FGFR1, PROKR2, PROK2 e NELF), and discuss the function of each codified protein in migration and maturation of the olfactory and GnRH neurons, with data from in vitro and in vivo studies. Finally we describe the clinical phenotype of patients carrying these mutations.A síndrome de Kallmann (SK) é a associação de hipogonadismo hipogonadotrófico (HH) e anosmia descrita por Maestre de San Juan, em 1856, e caracterizada como condição hereditária por Franz Josef Kallmann, em 1944. Muitos aspectos de sua patogenia, variabilidade fenotípica e genotípica foram desvendados nos últimos 15 anos. Conseqüentemente, tem sido difícil manter-se atualizado frente à rapidez que o conhecimento dessa condição é gerado. Nesta revisão, resgatamos aspectos históricos pouco conhecidos sobre a síndrome e seus descobridores; incorporamos novas descobertas relacionadas à embriogênese dos neurônios olfatórios e produtores de GnRH. Esse processo é fundamental para compreender a associação de hipogonadismo e anosmia; descrevemos a heterogeneidade fenotípica e genotípica, incluindo mutações em cinco genes (KAL-1, FGFR1, PROKR2, PROK2 e NELF). Para cada gene, discutimos a função da proteína codificada na migração e maturação dos neurônios olfatórios e GnRH a partir de estudos in vitro e modelos experimentais e descrevemos características clínicas dos portadores dessas mutações.Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Escola Paulista de Medicina Departamento de MedicinaUNIFESP, EPM, Depto. de MedicinaSciEL

Circadian Rhythm and Sleep Disruption: Causes, Metabolic Consequences and Countermeasures.

Circadian (∼ 24 hour) timing systems pervade all kingdoms of life, and temporally optimize behaviour and physiology in humans. Relatively recent changes to our environments, such as the introduction of artificial lighting, can disorganize the circadian system, from the level of the molecular clocks that regulate the timing of cellular activities to the level of synchronization between our daily cycles of behaviour and the solar day. Sleep/wake cycles are intertwined with the circadian system, and global trends indicate that these too are increasingly subject to disruption. A large proportion of the world's population is at increased risk of environmentally-driven circadian rhythm and sleep disruption, and a minority of individuals are also genetically predisposed to circadian misalignment and sleep disorders. The consequences of disruption to the circadian system and sleep are profound and include myriad metabolic ramifications, some of which may be compounded by adverse effects on dietary choices. If not addressed, the deleterious effects of such disruption will continue to cause widespread health problems; therefore, implementation of the numerous behavioural and pharmaceutical interventions that can help restore circadian system alignment and enhance sleep will be important

The Integration of Clinical Trials With the Practice of Medicine

Importance: Optimal health care delivery, both now and in the future, requires a continuous loop of knowledge generation, dissemination, and uptake on how best to provide care, not just determining what interventions work but also how best to ensure they are provided to those who need them. The randomized clinical trial (RCT) is the most rigorous instrument to determine what works in health care. However, major issues with both the clinical trials enterprise and the lack of integration of clinical trials with health care delivery compromise medicine's ability to best serve society. Observations: In most resource-rich countries, the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises function as separate entities, with siloed goals, infrastructure, and incentives. Consequently, RCTs are often poorly relevant and responsive to the needs of patients and those responsible for care delivery. At the same time, health care delivery systems are often disengaged from clinical trials and fail to rapidly incorporate knowledge generated from RCTs into practice. Though longstanding, these issues are more pressing given the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, heightened awareness of the disproportionate impact of poor access to optimal care on vulnerable populations, and the unprecedented opportunity for improvement offered by the digital revolution in health care. Four major areas must be improved. First, especially in the US, greater clarity is required to ensure appropriate regulation and oversight of implementation science, quality improvement, embedded clinical trials, and learning health systems. Second, greater adoption is required of study designs that improve statistical and logistical efficiency and lower the burden on participants and clinicians, allowing trials to be smarter, safer, and faster. Third, RCTs could be considerably more responsive and efficient if they were better integrated with electronic health records. However, this advance first requires greater adoption of standards and processes designed to ensure health data are adequately reliable and accurate and capable of being transferred responsibly and efficiently across platforms and organizations. Fourth, tackling the problems described above requires alignment of stakeholders in the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises through financial and nonfinancial incentives, which could be enabled by new legislation. Solutions exist for each of these problems, and there are examples of success for each, but there is a failure to implement at adequate scale. Conclusions and Relevance: The gulf between current care and that which could be delivered has arguably never been wider. A key contributor is that the 2 limbs of knowledge generation and implementation-the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises-operate as a house divided. Better integration of these 2 worlds is key to accelerated improvement in health care delivery