Diagnosis of biliary tract and ampullary carcinomas

Diagnostic methods for biliary tract carcinoma and the efficacy of these methods are discussed. Neither definite methods for early diagnosis nor specific markers are available in this disease. When this disease is suspected on the basis of clinical symptoms and risk factors, hemato-biochemical examination and abdominal ultrasonography are performed and, where appropriate, enhanced computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is carried out. Diagnoses of extrahepatic bile duct cancer and ampullary carcinoma are often made based on the presence of obstructive jaundice. Although rare, abdominal pain and pyrexia, as well as abnormal findings of the hepatobiliary system detected by hemato-biochemical examination, serve as a clue to making a diagnosis of these diseases. On the other hand, the early diagnosis of gallbladder cancer is scarcely possible on the basis of clinical symptoms, so when this cancer is found with the onset of abdominal pain and jaundice, it is already advanced at the time of detection, thus making a cure difficult. When gallbladder cancer is suspected, enhanced CT is carried out. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), in particular — one of the methods of enhanced CT — is useful for decision of surgical criteria, because MDCT shows findings such as localization and extension of the tumor, and the presence or absence of remote metastasis. Procedures such as magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasonography, bile duct biopsy, and cholangioscopy should be carried out taking into account indications for these procedures in individual patients. However, direct biliary tract imaging is necessary for making a precise diagnosis of the horizontal extension of bile duct cancer

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Macrophage regulation & function in helminth infection.

Macrophages are innate immune cells with essential roles in host defense, inflammation, immune regulation and repair. During infection with multicellular helminth parasites, macrophages contribute to pathogen trapping and killing as well as to tissue repair and the resolution of type 2 inflammation. Macrophages produce a broad repertoire of effector molecules, including enzymes, cytokines, chemokines and growth factors that govern anti-helminth immunity and repair of parasite-induced tissue damage. Helminth infection and the associated type 2 immune response induces an alternatively activated macrophage (AAM) phenotype that – beyond driving host defense - prevents aberrant Th2 cell activation and type 2 immunopathology. The immune regulatory potential of macrophages is exploited by helminth parasites that induce the production of anti-inflammatory mediators such as interleukin 10 or prostaglandin E2 to evade host immunity. Here, we summarize current insights into the mechanisms of macrophage-mediated host defense and repair during helminth infection and highlight recent progress on the immune regulatory crosstalk between macrophages and helminth parasites. We also point out important remaining questions such as the translation of findings from murine models to human settings of helminth infection as well as long-term consequences of helminth-induced macrophage reprogramming for subsequent host immunity

What can parasites tell us about the pathogenesis and treatment of asthma and allergic diseases?

The same mechanisms that enable host defense against helminths also drive allergic inflammation. This suggests that pathomechanisms of allergic diseases represent evolutionary old responses against helminth parasites and that studying antihelminth immunity may provide insights into pathomechanisms of asthma. However, helminths have developed an intricate array of immunoregulatory mechanisms to modulate type 2 immune mechanisms. This has led to the hypothesis that the lack of helminth infection may contribute to the rise in allergic sensitization in modern societies. Indeed, the anti-inflammatory potential of helminth (worm) parasites and their products in allergy and asthma has been recognized for decades. As helminth infections bring about multiple undesired effects including an increased susceptibility to other infections, intended helminth infection is not a feasible approach to broadly prevent or treat allergic asthma. Thus, the development of new helminth-based biopharmaceutics may represent a safer approach of harnessing type 2-suppressive effects of helminths. However, progress regarding the mechanisms and molecules that are employed by helminths to modulate allergic inflammation has been relatively recent. The scavenging of alarmins and the modulation of lipid mediator pathways and macrophage function by helminth proteins have been identified as important immunoregulatory mechanisms targeting innate immunity in asthma and allergy. In addition, by regulating the activation of dendritic cells and by promoting regulatory T-cell responses, helminth proteins can counterregulate the adaptive T helper 2 cell response that drives allergic inflammation. Despite these insights, important open questions remain to be addressed before helminth molecules can be used for the prevention and treatment of asthma and other allergic diseases

Influence of glycosylation on IL-12 family cytokine biogenesis and function.

The interleukin 12 (IL-12) family of cytokines regulates T cell functions and is key for the orchestration of immune responses. Each heterodimeric IL-12 family member is a glycoprotein. However, the impact of glycosylation on biogenesis and function of the different family members has remained incompletely defined.Here, we identify glycosylation sites within human IL-12 family subunits that become modified upon secretion. Building on these insights, we show that glycosylation is dispensable for secretion of human IL-12 family cytokines except for IL-35. Furthermore, our data show that glycosylation differentially influences IL-12 family cytokine functionality, with IL-27 being most strongly affected.Taken together, our study provides a comprehensive analysis of how glycosylation affects biogenesis and function of a key human cytokine family and provides the basis for selectively modulating their secretion via targeting glycosylation