Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that lacks effective treatment options. Anti-amyloid beta (Aβ) antibodies are the leading drug candidates to treat AD, but the results of clinical trials have been disappointing. Introducing rational mutations into anti-Aβ antibodies to increase their effectiveness is a way forward, but the path to take is unclear. In this study, we demonstrate the use of computational fragment-based docking and MMPBSA binding free energy calculations in the analysis of anti-Aβ antibodies for rational drug design efforts. Our fragment-based docking method successfully predicts the emergence of the common EFRH epitope. MD simulations coupled with MMPBSA binding free energy calculations are used to analyze scenarios described in prior studies, and we computationally introduce rational mutations into PFA1 to predict mutations that can improve its binding affinity toward the pE3-Aβ_3-8 form of Aβ. Two out of our four proposed mutations are predicted to stabilize binding. Our study demonstrates that a computational approach may lead to an improved drug candidate for AD in the future.

Many critics raise concerns about the prevalence of echo chambers on social media and their potential role in increasing political polarization. However, the lack of available data and the challenges of conducting large-scale field experiments have made it difficult to assess the scope of the problem1,2. Here we present data from 2020 for the entire population of active adult Facebook users in the USA showing that content from like-minded sources constitutes the majority of what people see on the platform, although political information and news represent only a small fraction of these exposures. To evaluate a potential response to concerns about the effects of echo chambers, we conducted a multi-wave field experiment on Facebook among 23,377 users for whom we reduced exposure to content from like-minded sources during the 2020 US presidential election by about one-third. We found that the intervention increased their exposure to content from cross-cutting sources and decreased exposure to uncivil language, but had no measurable effects on eight preregistered attitudinal measures such as affective polarization, ideological extremity, candidate evaluations and belief in false claims. These precisely estimated results suggest that although exposure to content from like-minded sources on social media is common, reducing its prevalence during the 2020 US presidential election did not correspondingly reduce polarization in beliefs or attitudes.

We study the effect of Facebook and Instagram access on political beliefs, attitudes, and behavior by randomizing a subset of 19,857 Facebook users and 15,585 Instagram users to deactivate their accounts for 6 wk before the 2020 U.S. election. We report four key findings. First, both Facebook and Instagram deactivation reduced an index of political participation (driven mainly by reduced participation online). Second, Facebook deactivation had no significant effect on an index of knowledge, but secondary analyses suggest that it reduced knowledge of general news while possibly also decreasing belief in misinformation circulating online. Third, Facebook deactivation may have reduced self-reported net votes for Trump, though this effect does not meet our preregistered significance threshold. Finally, the effects of both Facebook and Instagram deactivation on affective and issue polarization, perceived legitimacy of the election, candidate favorability, and voter turnout were all precisely estimated and close to zero.