Neutrophils in cancer: neutral no more

Neutrophils are indispensable antagonists of microbial infection and facilitators of wound healing. In the cancer setting, a newfound appreciation for neutrophils has come into view. The traditionally held belief that neutrophils are inert bystanders is being challenged by the recent literature. Emerging evidence indicates that tumours manipulate neutrophils, sometimes early in their differentiation process, to create diverse phenotypic and functional polarization states able to alter tumour behaviour. In this Review, we discuss the involvement of neutrophils in cancer initiation and progression, and their potential as clinical biomarkers and therapeutic targets

Loss-of-Function Variants in HOPS Complex Genes VPS16 and VPS41 Cause Early Onset Dystonia Associated with Lysosomal Abnormalities.

OBJECTIVES: The majority of people with suspected genetic dystonia remain undiagnosed after maximal investigation, implying that a number of causative genes have not yet been recognized. We aimed to investigate this paucity of diagnoses. METHODS: We undertook weighted burden analysis of whole-exome sequencing (WES) data from 138 individuals with unresolved generalized dystonia of suspected genetic etiology, followed by additional case-finding from international databases, first for the gene implicated by the burden analysis (VPS16), and then for other functionally related genes. Electron microscopy was performed on patient-derived cells. RESULTS: Analysis revealed a significant burden for VPS16 (Fisher's exact test p value, 6.9 × 109 ). VPS16 encodes a subunit of the homotypic fusion and vacuole protein sorting (HOPS) complex, which plays a key role in autophagosome-lysosome fusion. A total of 18 individuals harboring heterozygous loss-of-function VPS16 variants, and one with a microdeletion, were identified. These individuals experienced early onset progressive dystonia with predominant cervical, bulbar, orofacial, and upper limb involvement. Some patients had a more complex phenotype with additional neuropsychiatric and/or developmental comorbidities. We also identified biallelic loss-of-function variants in VPS41, another HOPS-complex encoding gene, in an individual with infantile-onset generalized dystonia. Electron microscopy of patient-derived lymphocytes and fibroblasts from both patients with VPS16 and VPS41 showed vacuolar abnormalities suggestive of impaired lysosomal function. INTERPRETATION: Our study strongly supports a role for HOPS complex dysfunction in the pathogenesis of dystonia, although variants in different subunits display different phenotypic and inheritance characteristics. ANN NEUROL 2020;88:867-877

Identification of Degraded Land in the Canary Islands; Tests and Reviews

Degraded Land is an area that either by natural causes (fires, floods, storms or volcanic eruptions) or more by direct or indirect causes of human action, has been altered or modified from its natural state. Restoration is an activity that initiates or accelerates the recovery of an ecosystem. It can be defined as the set of actions taken in order to reverse or reduce the damage caused in the territory. In the case of the Canary Islands there is a high possibility for the territory to suffer processes that degrade the environment, given that the islands are very fragile ecosystems. Added to this they are territories isolated from the continent, which complicates the process of restoring them. In this paper, the different types of common degraded areas in the Canary Islands are identified, as well as the proposed solutions for remediation, such as afforestation of agricultural land or landfill closure and restoration

A knowledge, attitudes, and practice survey among obstetrician-gynaecologists on intimate partner violence in Flanders, Belgium

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) has consistently been found to afflict one in twenty pregnant women and is therefore considered a leading cause of physical injury, mental illness and adverse pregnancy outcome. A general antenatal screening policy has been advocated, though compliance with such guidelines tends to be low. We therefore attempted to identify potential barriers to IPV screening in a context where no guidelines have been instigated yet. METHODS: Questionnaire-based Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice survey among obstetrician-gynaecologists in Flanders, Belgium (n = 478). RESULTS: The response rate was 52.1% (249/478). Gynaecologists prove rather unfamiliar with IPV and therefore largely underestimate the extent of the problem. Merely 6.8% (17/249) of the respondents ever received or pursued any kind of education on IPV. Accordingly they do feel insufficiently skilled to deal with IPV, yet sufficiently capable of recognizing IPV among their patients. Survey participants largely refute the incentive of universal screening in favour of opportunistic screening and do not consider pregnancy as a window of opportunity for routine screening. They do consider screening for IPV as an issue of medical liability and therefore do not suffer from a lack of motivation to screen. In addition, obstetrician-gynaecologists do believe that screening for IPV may be an effective means to counteract abusive behaviours. Yet, their outcome expectancy is weighed down by their perceived lack of self-efficacy in dealing with IPV, by lack of familiarity with referral procedures and by their perceived lack of available referral services. Major external or patient-related barriers to IPV screening included a perceived lack of time and fear of offending or insulting patients. Overall, merely 8.4 % (21/245) of gynaecologists in this survey performed some kind of IPV questioning on a regular basis. Finally, physician education was found to be the strongest predictor of a positive attitude towards screening and of current screening practices. CONCLUSION: Endorsement of physician training on IPV is an important first step towards successful implementation of screening guidelines for IPV. Additional introduction of enabling and reinforcement strategies such as screening tools, patient leaflets, formal referral pathways, and physician feedback may further enhance compliance with screening recommendations and guidelines

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field