Definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines

This article discusses the definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Acute cholangitis and cholecystitis mostly originate from stones in the bile ducts and gallbladder. Acute cholecystitis also has other causes, such as ischemia; chemicals that enter biliary secretions; motility disorders associated with drugs; infections with microorganisms, protozoa, and parasites; collagen disease; and allergic reactions. Acute acalculous cholecystitis is associated with a recent operation, trauma, burns, multisystem organ failure, and parenteral nutrition. Factors associated with the onset of cholelithiasis include obesity, age, and drugs such as oral contraceptives. The reported mortality of less than 10% for acute cholecystitis gives an impression that it is not a fatal disease, except for the elderly and/or patients with acalculous disease. However, there are reports of high mortality for cholangitis, although the mortality differs greatly depending on the year of the report and the severity of the disease. Even reports published in and after the 1980s indicate high mortality, ranging from 10% to 30% in the patients, with multiorgan failure as a major cause of death. Because many of the reports on acute cholecystitis and cholangitis use different standards, comparisons are difficult. Variations in treatment and risk factors influencing the mortality rates indicate the necessity for standardized diagnostic, treatment, and severity assessment criteria

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

CD200 receptor restriction of myeloid cell responses antagonizes antiviral immunity and facilitates cytomegalovirus persistence within mucosal tissue

CD200 receptor (CD200R) negatively regulates peripheral and mucosal innate immune responses. Viruses, including herpesviruses, have acquired functional CD200 orthologs, implying that viral exploitation of this pathway is evolutionary advantageous. However, the role that CD200R signaling plays during herpesvirus infection in vivo requires clarification. Utilizing the murine cytomegalovirus (MCMV) model, we demonstrate that CD200R facilitates virus persistence within mucosal tissue. Specifically, MCMV infection of CD200R-deficient mice (CD200R-/-) elicited heightened mucosal virus-specific CD4 T cell responses that restricted virus persistence in the salivary glands. CD200R did not directly inhibit lymphocyte effector function. Instead, CD200R-/- mice exhibited enhanced APC accumulation that in the mucosa was a consequence of elevated cellular proliferation. Although MCMV does not encode an obvious CD200 homolog, productive replication in macrophages induced expression of cellular CD200. CD200 from hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic cells contributed independently to suppression of antiviral control in vivo. These results highlight the CD200-CD200R pathway as an important regulator of antiviral immunity during cytomegalovirus infection that is exploited by MCMV to establish chronicity within mucosal tissue

Targeted inhibition of gut bacterial β-glucuronidase activity enhances anticancer drug efficacy

Irinotecan treats a range of solid tumors, but its effectiveness is severely limited by gastrointestinal (GI) tract toxicity caused by gut bacterial β-glucuronidase (GUS) enzymes. Targeted bacterial GUS inhibitors have been shown to partially alleviate irinotecan-induced GI tract damage and resultant diarrhea in mice. Here, we unravel the mechanistic basis for GI protection by gut microbial GUS inhibitors using in vivo models. We use in vitro, in fimo, and in vivo models to determine whether GUS inhibition alters the anticancer efficacy of irinotecan. We demonstrate that a single dose of irinotecan increases GI bacterial GUS activity in 1 d and reduces intestinal epithelial cell proliferation in 5 d, both blocked by a single dose of a GUS inhibitor. In a tumor xenograft model, GUS inhibition prevents intestinal toxicity and maintains the antitumor efficacy of irinotecan. Remarkably, GUS inhibitor also effectively blocks the striking irinotecan-induced bloom of Enterobacteriaceae in immune-deficient mice. In a genetically engineered mouse model of cancer, GUS inhibition alleviates gut damage, improves survival, and does not alter gut microbial composition; however, by allowing dose intensification, it dramatically improves irinotecan’s effectiveness, reducing tumors to a fraction of that achieved by irinotecan alone, while simultaneously promoting epithelial regeneration. These results indicate that targeted gut microbial enzyme inhibitors can improve cancer chemotherapeutic outcomes by protecting the gut epithelium from microbial dysbiosis and proliferative crypt damage