Toll-like receptor polymorphisms and cerebral malaria: <it>TLR2 </it>Δ22 polymorphism is associated with protection from cerebral malaria in a case control study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In malaria endemic areas, host genetics influence whether a <it>Plasmodium falciparum</it>-infected child develops uncomplicated or severe malaria. TLR2 has been identified as a receptor for <it>P. falciparum</it>-derived glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI), and polymorphisms within the TLR2 gene may affect disease pathogenesis. There are two common polymorphisms in the 5' un-translated region (UTR) of TLR2, a 22 base pair deletion in the first unstranslated exon (Δ22), and a GT dinucleotide repeat in the second intron (GTn).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>These polymorphisms were examined in a Ugandan case control study on children with either cerebral malaria or uncomplicated malaria. Serum cytokine levels were analysed by ELISA, according to genotype and disease status. In vitro TLR2 expression was measured according to genotype.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Both Δ22 and GTn polymorphisms were highly frequent, but only Δ22 heterozygosity was associated with protection from cerebral malaria (OR 0.34, 95% confidence intervals 0.16, 0.73). In vitro, heterozygosity for Δ22 was associated with reduced pam3cys inducible TLR2 expression in human monocyte derived macrophages. In uncomplicated malaria patients, Δ22 homozygosity was associated with elevated serum IL-6 (<it>p </it>= 0.04), and long GT repeat alleles were associated with elevated TNF (<it>p </it>= 0.007).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Reduced inducible TLR2 expression may lead to attenuated pro-inflammatory responses, a potential mechanism of protection from cerebral malaria present in individuals heterozygous for the TLR2 Δ22 polymorphism.</p

TP53 status and taxane-platinum versus platinum-based therapy in ovarian cancer patients: A non-randomized retrospective study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Taxane-platinum therapy (TP) has replaced platinum-based therapy (PC or PAC, DNA damaging chemotherapy) in the postoperative treatment of ovarian cancer patients; however, it is not always effective. TP53 protein plays a differential role in response to DNA-damaging agents and taxanes. We sought to define profiles of patients who benefit the most from TP and also of those who can be treated with PC.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We compared the effectiveness of PC/PAC (n = 253) and TP (n = 199) with respect to tumor TP53 accumulation in ovarian cancer patients with FIGO stage IIB-IV disease; this was a non-randomized retrospective study. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed on 452 archival tumors; univariate and multivariate analysis by the Cox's and logistic regression models was performed in all patients and in subgroups with [TP53(+)] and without TP53 accumulation [TP53(-)].</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The advantage of taxane-platinum therapy over platinum-based therapy was seen in the TP53(+), and not in the TP53(-) group. In the TP53(+) group taxane-platinum therapy enhanced the probability of complete remission (p = .018), platinum sensitivity (p = .014), platinum highly sensitive response (p = .038) and longer survival (OS, p = .008). Poor tumor differentiation diminished the advantage from taxane-platinum therapy in the TP53(+) group. In the TP53(-) group PC/PAC was at least equally efficient as taxane-platinum therapy and it enhanced the chance of platinum highly sensitive response (p = .010). However, in the TP53(-) group taxane-platinum therapy possibly diminished the risk of death in patients over 53 yrs (p = .077). Among factors that positively interacted with taxane-platinum therapy in some analyses were endometrioid and clear cell type, FIGO III stage, bulky residual tumor, more advanced age of patient and moderate tumor differentiation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results suggest that taxane-platinum therapy is particularly justified in patients with TP53(+) tumors or older than 53 years. In the group of patients ≤53 yrs and with TP53(-) tumors platinum-based therapy is possibly equally efficient. We provide hints for planning randomized trials to verify these observations.</p

Mifepristone prevents repopulation of ovarian cancer cells escaping cisplatin-paclitaxel therapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Advanced ovarian cancer is treated with cytoreductive surgery and combination platinum- and taxane-based chemotherapy. Although most patients have acute clinical response to this strategy, the disease ultimately recurs. In this work we questioned whether the synthetic steroid mifepristone, which as monotherapy inhibits the growth of ovarian cancer cells, is capable of preventing repopulation of ovarian cancer cells if given after a round of lethal cisplatin-paclitaxel combination treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We established an <it>in vitro</it> approach wherein ovarian cancer cells with various sensitivities to cisplatin or paclitaxel were exposed to a round of lethal doses of cisplatin for 1 h plus paclitaxel for 3 h. Thereafter, cells were maintained in media with or without mifepristone, and short- and long-term cytotoxicity was assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Four days after treatment the lethality of cisplatin-paclitaxel was evidenced by reduced number of cells, increased hypodiploid DNA content, morphological features of apoptosis, DNA fragmentation, and cleavage of caspase-3, and of its downstream substrate PARP. Short-term presence of mifepristone either enhanced or did not modify such acute lethality. Seven days after receiving cisplatin-paclitaxel, cultures showed signs of relapse with escaping colonies that repopulated the plate in a time-dependent manner. Conversely, cultures exposed to cisplatin-paclitaxel followed by mifepristone not only did not display signs of repopulation following initial chemotherapy, but they also had their clonogenic capacity drastically reduced when compared to cells repopulating after cisplatin-paclitaxel.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Cytostatic concentrations of mifepristone after exposure to lethal doses of cisplatin and paclitaxel in combination blocks repopulation of remnant cells surviving and escaping the cytotoxic drugs.</p

Physiological roles of macrophages

Macrophages are present in mammals from midgestation, contributing to physiologic homeostasis throughout life. Macrophages arise from yolk sac and foetal liver progenitors during embryonic development in the mouse and persist in different organs as heterogeneous, self-renewing tissue-resident populations. Bone marrow-derived blood monocytes are recruited after birth to replenish tissue-resident populations and to meet further demands during inflammation, infection and metabolic perturbations. Macrophages of mixed origin and different locations vary in replication and turnover, but are all active in mRNA and protein synthesis, fulfilling organ-specific and systemic trophic functions, in addition to host defence. In this review we emphasise selected properties and non-immune functions of tissue macrophages which contribute to physiologic homeostasis

Strategies to Target Tumor Immunosuppression

The tumor microenvironment is currently in the spotlight of cancer immunology research as a key factor impacting tumor development and progression. While antigen-specific immune responses play a crucial role in tumor rejection, the tumor hampers these immune responses by creating an immunosuppressive microenvironment. Recently, major progress has been achieved in the field of cancer immunotherapy, and several groundbreaking clinical trials demonstrated the potency of such therapeutic interventions in patients. Yet, the responses greatly vary among individuals. This calls for the rational design of more efficacious cancer immunotherapeutic interventions that take into consideration the “immune signature” of the tumor. Multimodality treatment regimens that aim to enhance intratumoral homing and activation of antigen-specific immune effector cells, while simultaneously targeting tumor immunosuppression, are pivotal for potent antitumor immunity

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls

Background The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. Methods We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. Findings We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01–1.03), male (1.54, 1.16–2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06–3.13 and 4.19, 2.14–8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09–2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00–1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00–1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). Interpretation Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. Funding PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders