Cytomegalovirus and bone marrow transplantation

published_or_final_versionMicrobiologyMasterMaster of Philosoph

Post-COVID-19 Pandemic Rebound of Macrolide-Resistant <i>Mycoplasma pneumoniae</i> Infection: A Descriptive Study

The rebound characteristics of respiratory infections after lifting pandemic control measures were uncertain. From January to November 2023, patients presenting at a teaching hospital were tested for common respiratory viruses and Mycoplasma pneumoniae using a combination of antigen, nucleic acid amplification, and targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) tests. The number and rate of positive tests per month, clinical and microbiological characteristics were analyzed. A rapid rebound of SARS-CoV-2 was followed by a slower rebound of M. pneumoniae, with an interval of 5 months between their peaks. The hospitalization rate was higher, with infections caused by respiratory viruses compared to M. pneumoniae. Though the pediatric hospitalization rate of respiratory viruses (66.1%) was higher than that of M. pneumoniae (34.0%), the 4094 cases of M. pneumoniae within 6 months posed a huge burden on healthcare services. Multivariate analysis revealed that M. pneumoniae-infected adults had more fatigue, comorbidities, and higher serum C-reactive protein, whereas children had a higher incidence of other respiratory pathogens detected by tNGS or pathogen-specific PCR, fever, and were more likely to be female. A total of 85% of M. pneumoniae-positive specimens had mutations detected at the 23rRNA gene, with 99.7% showing A2063G mutation. Days to defervescence were longer in those not treated by effective antibiotics and those requiring a change in antibiotic treatment. A delayed but significant rebound of M. pneumoniae was observed after the complete relaxation of pandemic control measures. No unusual, unexplained, or unresponsive cases of respiratory infections which warrant further investigation were identified

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

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