Phi Zeta Research Emphasis Day Call for Abstracts

 

To:  SVM Faculty, Advanced Studies Students, Professional Students, Post-Doctoral Researchers, House Officers, Residents and Staff

From:  Dr. Cherie Pucheu-Haston, President; Dr. S. Jeyaseelan (Jey), Secretary/Treasurer, Tau Chapter of Phi Zeta

Date:  August 05, 2016

Re:        CALL FOR ABSTRACTS - PHI ZETA RESEARCH EMPHASIS DAY

 

PDF of these Instructions

 

This year, the Phi Zeta Research Emphasis Day will be held on Wednesday, September 28. The organizing committee would like to encourage all faculty, post-doctoral researchers, advanced studies students, and professional students to submit abstracts for this event.  All presentations will be in poster format. Although summer scholars do not need to reformat or reprint their posters for Phi Zeta, they do need to submit an abstract.

 

Eligibility to Compete

Any SVM Graduate, Professional Students or Postdoctoral researchers or non-SVM students mentored by an SVM faculty member.

      Those posters presented by advanced studies students, professional students and postdoctoral researchers will be judged by a panel of non-SVM scientists for monetary prizes in four categories:  (1) Dissertation (PhD) students 2) Basic research for thesis (M.S.), professional students, and house officers; (3) Clinical research for thesis (M.S.), professional students, and house officers; and 4) Post-doctoral researchers. A total of 4 prizes will be awarded to groups 1-3 (1st ($300), 2nd ($200), 3rd ($100) and 4th ($50)) whereas 3 prizes (1st, 2nd and 3rd) will be awarded to group 4. The clinical research category is relatively new and is defined as research that:

  • focuses on a question originating from clinical veterinary medicine
  • is relevant to the animal species associated with the clinical question
  • may use all available research methods (from the animal to the molecule)

 

The committee also encourages the participation of SVM faculty members. Faculty wishing to display their posters only need to submit the names of the authors, abstract title(s) and the number of poster boards required. 

 

Deadline 

The deadline for abstract submissions is 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, September 12.  Please note that any abstracts submitted after September 12 will not be accepted. Please submit your abstracts to Ms. Jamie O’Quinn via email jamieo@lsu.edu.  Submitted abstracts will be used to prepare a Phi Zeta Research Emphasis Day Program.  Abstracts will be distributed to the non-SVM judges in advance of the poster presentation.  Please note that SVM Media Services (Mr. Michael Broussard) is no longer printing posters. Options for printing are at Middleton Library, or by some other personal arrangement.

 

This event is an exceptional opportunity for individuals in the SVM scientific community to present the results of their research efforts to other members of the SVM and LSU communities. It serves as an important showcase for SVM Research activity. We anticipate the presence of the Provost and Vice Provost for Research and Economic Development from the main campus.

 

Important Dates to Remember

Abstracts: Due by 5:00 P.M., 9/12/2016.  Submit to Jamie O’Quinn (jamieo@lsu.edu)
Hang posters by 9/26/2015 morning.
Phi Zeta Day:  9/28/2016
Please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Cherie Pucheu-Haston (cpucheu@lsu.edu), Dr. Jey (jey@lsu.edu), or Ms. O’Quinn (jamieo@lsu.edu) for additional information. 

 

Guidelines for Abstract Preparation

Advanced studies, professional, and undergraduate students as well as Post-doctoral researchers should submit abstracts and a note stating in which of the 4 categories they are competing.  Faculty wishing to present posters should submit the author names, abstract title(s), and the number of poster boards required. 

 

The abstracts should be submitted as a single-spaced, typed pdf document.  The font should be at least 10 characters per inch (font size 12) and the page should have a minimum of one-inch margins on all sides.  The abstract body is limited to 250 words (Note that the 250 word limit does NOT include the title, authors and departmental information). The abstract should contain the following sections. Template abstracts are also enclosed for additional information.

 

Title: Adequately describe the study (to be consistent, please capitalize the first letter of each word in your title.  For example, “Guidelines for Abstract and Poster Preparation”).

 

Authors: Include all authors. (To be consistent, please list the authors’ names using the initials for the first name followed by the last name and list the participant’s name in bold, e.g, J. Smith).

 

Rationale: State the rationale for the study and provide appropriate background information and hypothesis or objectives. Indicate the objective and purpose of the research, the hypothesis that was tested or a description of the problem being evaluated or analyzed.

 

Methods: Clearly describe the technique(s) and statistical analyses employed in this investigation.  Describe the study duration/setting/location, study population, study design, data collection and methods of analysis employed.

 

Results: Clearly presented and consistent with the experimental methods and design.  Present as clearly and in as much detail as possible the observations/outcome of the study. Please summarize specific results.

 

Conclusions: Accurate interpretation of results within the context of the original hypotheses/objective(s).  Explain the significance of the findings/outcome of the study for prevention, treatment, care and/or support, and future implications of the findings.

 

Significance/Impact/Implications: Place the results and conclusions of the investigation within the context of our current knowledge of the subject area.

 

Abstracts are due by 5:00 P.M., 9/15/2015.  Submit electronically to Jamie O’Quinn, Rm 1102 via email (jamieo@lsu.edu)

 

Template Abstract 1 - Basic Science

Differentiation of Canine Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells into Neural Progenitor Cells

 

XXXX

Laboratory for XXX, Department of XXX, XXX University

 

Background and Rationale: New advances in stem cell technology, including induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC), offers new hope for patients with neurological disease and spinal cord injuries. Therefore, we evaluated the ability of canine iPSC to be differentiated into neural progenitor cells (NPC) in vitro as a precursor to clinical trials in dogs with spinal cord injury.

 

Approach: iPSC were generated from canine fibroblasts and characterized based on phenotype, gene expression analysis, lineage differentiation, and teratoma formation. Canine iPSC were then induced to differentiate into NPC by culture in defined medium supplemented with specific growth factors. NPC were characterized by phenotype, flow cytometry, immunofluorescence, and gene expression analysis.

 

Results: Canine iPSC could be readily induced to differentiate into NPC following 2-3 weeks in culture. Specific culture conditions led to enrichment of NPC for cells with characteristics of oligodendrocytes, astrocytes and neurons. NPC did not form teratomas in mice, whereas the parental iPSC cells did.

 

Conclusions/Implications: Canine iPSC can be induced to form NPC in vitro by altering cell culture conditions, cell substrate, and addition of specific growth factors. These studies provide evidence that iPSC technology can be used to generate NPC for use in neural regeneration in dogs with neurological injuries.

 

Template Abstract 2 - Basic Science

Key Role for Scavenger Receptor B-I In the Integrative Physiology of Host Defense During Bacterial Pneumonia

 

K.M. XXX, M.B. XXX,
Department of  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

Rationale: Scavenger Receptor B-I (SR-BI) is a multi-recognition receptor mostly studied in the arena of atherosclerosis due to its role in cellular uptake of cholesterol ester from high density lipoprotein (HDL). Recently, SR-BI has also been reported to play a role in clearance of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from the plasma.

 

Methods: SR-BI+/+ and SR-BI-/- mice were infected intratracheally with Klebsiella pneumoniae (Kp), or challenged with aerosolized LPS. Survival, leukocyte influx into the airspace, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) cytokines, and bacterial CFUs in lung and blood were quantified. Bactericidal function of neutrophils (PMNs) was evaluated.

 

Results: Compared to SR-BI+/+ counterparts, SR-BI-/- mice suffered markedly increased mortality during pneumonia, in conjunction with higher bacterial burden in lung and blood, deficient induction in the plasma of the stress glucocorticoid corticosterone, higher serum cytokines, and increased peripheral organ injury. SR-BI-/- mice had significantly enhanced PMN recruitment to the airspace as well as increased BALF TNF-α, G-CSF, and CXCL5 after pulmonary exposure to either Kp or LPS. This was associated with defective clearance of LPS from the SR-BI-/- airway and increased cytokine production by SR-BI-/- macrophages. SR-BI-/- PMNs displayed decreased phagocytosis and a dramatic defect in intracellular bacterial killing.

 

Conclusions: SR-BI is central regulator of the integrated pulmonary host defense response through multiple interacting mechanisms, including modulation of alveolar cytokine induction, PMN recruitment, and PMN function.

 

Template Abstract 1 - Translational/Clinical Science

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of an Extended Release Buprenorphine Formulation in Dogs

 

XXXX

Department of XXX, College of Veterinary Medicine, XXX University,

 

Rationale: The options for effective and safe long-term post-operative analgesia in canine patients are very limited. The purpose of this study was to describe the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an extended-release buprenorphine (ERB) formulation in healthy adult dogs. We hypothesized that plasma concentrations associated with therapeutic efficacy would be maintained for 72 hours after a single subcutaneous administration of ERB.

 

Methods: Six healthy mixed breed dogs were administered either ERB (0.2 mg/kg SQ) or intravenous buprenorphine (IVB, 0.02 mg/kg) in a prospective, randomized, blinded, positive control crossover study. Blood samples were collected and analyzed for plasma buprenorphine concentrations using ultra high pressure liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. Thermal withdrawal latency, sedation scores, and vital signs were obtained at predetermined intervals for 6 days in each study period.

 

Results: Maximum plasma concentrations (median, range) of buprenorphine in dogs receiving ERB was 5 (4.3-11.0) ng/mL, which occurred at 8 (4-36) hours (Tmax). Therapeutic plasma concentrations (>1 ng/mL) occurred from 0.5 to 72 hours after administration in most (5/6) dogs. Thermal withdrawal latency was significantly prolonged for 48 hours in dogs after ERB administration and for up to 4 hours when dogs received IVB. Sedation scores were not significantly different in dogs receiving IVB or ERB, and no serious adverse effects were seen in either treatment group.

 

Conclusions/significance: These results suggest that a single dose of 0.2 mg/kg ERB is safe, provides consistent therapeutic plasma concentrations, and exhibits prolonged analgesia in healthy dogs.

 

Template Abstract 2 - Translational/Clinical Science

Low Lung Injury Score Predicts Under-Recognition Of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

 

X.M. XXX, C.B. XXX,
Department of  XXXXXXXXX

 

Rationale: Low-tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) has been shown to significantly reduce mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We investigated the rate of clinician recognition of ARDS in a single center and sought to identify clinical factors associated with under-recognition of ARDS.

 

Methods: From a prospective cohort of 363 patients admitted from the emergency department to the intensive care unit (ICU), we identified 72 patients who met Berlin criteria for ARDS as determined by review of chest radiographs and clinical information from the first 5 days in the ICU. We then tested the association of clinician recognition of ARDS with patient-level clinical variables and used backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to identify independent predictors of ARDS recognition.

 

Results: Within 7 days of meeting diagnostic criteria for ARDS, 40% of patients had clinical documentation of the diagnosis of ARDS; 51% had ARDS mentioned as part of a differential diagnosis; and 40% had discussion of LTVV strategies in the medical record. Overall, 53% of patients with ARDS had either recognition of ARDS or discussion of LTVV in their medical record. Clinician diagnosis of ARDS was associated with implementation of LTVV (<8 mL/kg IBW) within 2 days of meeting diagnostic criteria (mean TV 7.3 vs. 8.5 mL/kg IBW, p=0.03).

 

Conclusions: Clinician recognition of ARDS remains poor, with many cases going unrecognized. Severity of ARDS as measured by Lung Injury Score was the strongest predictor for clinician recognition of ARDS. Clinician recognition of ARDS was associated with use of LTVV strategies.

 

Guidelines for Poster Preparation

The maximum size of each poster is 3 feet (36 inches) high by 4 feet (48 inches) wide.

 

The poster boards are covered with felt. To hang the posters on the board, please use Velcro behind the poster board.


Poster Judging Process

Judges are chosen from members of both the scientific and veterinary practitioner (non-SVM) community from across the entire state as well as the entire LSU system.

 

Although judges participating in the research emphasis day will be identified as a group, the identity of judges responsible for reviewing specific posters will NOT be released.

 

When possible, judges are assigned to posters using a computer random number generator.  Judge assignments are then manually reviewed to make sure that no judge reviews their own (or their students’) posters.

 

Judge assignments are also reviewed to make sure that the same judge does not review the same student multiple times, and that “pairs” of judges are not assigned to review multiple posters together.

 

Judges will provide a numeric score of each poster.  These scores will then be tallied electronically.  The posters in each category will then be ranked and this ranking will be used to determine first, second, etc. place posters. 

 

Specific written commentary is encouraged and may be provided by the reviewers.  This commentary will be transcribed and will be made available to the poster presenters, although it will not itself factor into the ranking process.

 

If a presenter wishes to see their raw score after the competition, they will be allowed to do so although the score alone may not convey much information.  The presenters will NOT be allowed to view the scores of others.