Beryllium increases the CD14^dimCD16+ subset in the lung of chronic beryllium disease

CD14dimCD16+ and CD14brightCD16+ cells, which compose a minor population of monocytes in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), have been implicated in several inflammatory diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this phenotype was present as a subset of lung infiltrative alveolar macrophages (AMs) in the granulomatous lung disease, chronic beryllium disease (CBD). The monocytes subsets was determined from PBMC cells and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) cells from CBD, beryllium sensitized Non-smoker (BeS-NS) and healthy subjects (HS) using flow cytometry. The impact of smoking on the AMs cell phenotype was determined by using BAL cells from BeS smokers (BeS-S). In comparison with the other monocyte subpopulations, CD14dimCD16+ cells were at decreased frequency in PBMCs of both BeS-NS and CBD and showed higher HLA-DR expression, compared to HS. The AMs from CBD and BeS-NS demonstrated a CD14dimCD16+phenotype, while CD14brightCD16+ cells were found at increased frequency in AMs of BeS, compared to HS. Fresh AMs from BeS-NS and CBD demonstrated significantly greater CD16, CD40, CD86 and HLA-DR than HS and BeS-S. The expression of CD16 on AMs from both CBD and BeS-NS was downregulated significantly after 10μM BeSO4 stimulation. The phagocytic activity of AMs decreased after 10μM BeSO4 treatment in both BeS-NS and CBD, although was altered or reduced in HS and BeS-S. These results suggest that Be increases the CD14dimCD16+ subsets in the lung of CBD subjects. We speculate that Be-stimulates the compartmentalization of a more mature CD16+ macrophage phenotype and that in turn these macrophages are a source of Th1 cytokines and chemokines that perpetuate the Be immune response in CBD. The protective effect of cigarette smoking in BeS-S may be due to the low expression of co-stimulatory markers on AMs from smokers as well as the decreased phagocytic function

The role and choice criteria of antihistamines in allergy management – expert opinion

Allergic diseases are the most common chronic conditions lasting throughout the patient’s life. They not only cause significant deterioration in the quality of life of patients but also lead to significant absenteeism and reduced productivity, resulting in very high costs for society. Effective and safe treatment of allergic diseases is therefore one of the main challenges for public health and should be carried out by all the specialists in family medicine, internists and paediatricians in collaboration with allergists, otorhinolaryngologists and dermatologists. Antihistamines are most commonly used in the treatment of allergies. Several dozen drugs are available on the pharmaceutical market, and their generic forms are advertised widely as very effective drugs for the treatment of allergic diseases. What is the truth? What are the data from clinical trials and observational studies? Are all drugs equally effective and safe for the patient? According to a panel of experts representing various fields of medicine, inappropriate treatment of allergies can be very risky for patients, and seemingly equally acting medications may differ greatly. Therefore, a panel of experts gathered the latest data from the entire scientific literature and analysed the latest standards and recommendations prepared by scientific societies. This paper provides a summary of these studies and highlights the importance for the patient of the proper choice of drug to treat his allergies

The Review of Ophthalmic Symptoms in COVID-19

Aleksander Robert Stawowski,1 Joanna Konopińska,2 Sylwester Szymon Stawowski,3 Justyna Adamczuk,4 Monika Groth,5 Anna Moniuszko-Malinowska,4 Piotr Czupryna4 1Department of Ophthalmology, University Clinical Hospital in Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland; 2Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland; 3Non-Public Health Care Facility MEDIX, Bialystok, Poland; 4Department of Infectious Diseases and Neuroinfectious, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland; 5Department of Allergology and Internal Diseases, University Clinical Hospital in Bialystok, Bialystok, PolandCorrespondence: Aleksander Robert Stawowski, Department of Ophthalmology, University Clinical Hospital in Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland, Tel +48-668101778, Email [email protected]: The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 had a significant impact on the health of the global human population, affecting almost every human organ, including the organ of vision. Research focus on understanding the pathophysiology, identifying symptoms and complications of the disease. Eye-related pathologies are important foci of research due to the potential for direct impact of the virus. Ophthalmologists around the world are reporting various symptoms of eye infections and ocular pathologies associated with SARS-CoV-2. The review of ophthalmic symptoms was conducted to help physicians of various specialties recognize possible ophthalmic manifestations of this viral disease. A literature review was conducted from January 2020 to July 2023 in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Science Direct, Scopus, Scielo and Google Scholar databases. The review of the literature showed that conjunctivitis is the most common ophthalmic symptom observed during the course of COVID-19 and can occur at any stage of the disease. Changes in the eye may result from the direct effect of the virus, immune response, prothrombotic states, comorbidities, and medications used. Symptoms related to the organ of vision can be divided into: changes affecting the protective apparatus of the eye, the anterior eye segment, the posterior eye segment, neuro-ophthalmic, and orbital changes. Ocular symptoms may suggest COVID-19 infection or appear several weeks after recovery. Following COVID-19 vaccinations, a diverse range of ophthalmic symptoms was observed in various locations and at different times, mirroring the ocular symptoms experienced throughout the course of the COVID-19 illness. It is important for physicians of all specialties to be aware of possible potential connections between eye diseases and SARS-CoV-2, in order to effectively diagnose and treat patients.Keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, ocular symptom

Induction of interleukin 6 and interleukin 8 expression by Broncho-Vaxom (OM-85 BV) via C-Fos/serum responsive element.

BACKGROUND: Broncho-Vaxom (OM-85 BV) increases the resistance of the respiratory tract to bacterial infections by modulating host immune responses. The compound increases serum IgG levels but decreases IgE levels in patients suffering from chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It increases concentrations of gamma-interferon (IFN-gamma), IgA, and interleukin (IL)-2 in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of patients with bronchitis. Treatment with OM-85 BV increases the number of T helper and natural killer cells. In this study the effects of OM-85 BV on transcription of cytokines is investigated in human lung fibroblasts. METHODS: Transcription and synthesis of IL-6 and IL-8 were assessed in cultured primary human lung fibroblasts using standard methods of Northern blot analysis for the level of mRNAs and enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for proteins. RESULTS: Broncho-Vaxom (OM-85 BV) at different concentrations induced transcription of IL-6 and IL-8. The effect of the drug on transcription of IL-6 and IL-8 genes correlated with secretion of the proteins into cell supernatants. OM-85 BV-dependent expression of the interleukin genes involved C-Fos/serum responsive element (C-Fos/SRE). CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the various immunopharmacological activities of OM-85 BV that have been described in clinical studies may be explained by its ability to induce expression of IL-6 and IL-8

Inhibitors of immune checkpoints-PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4-new opportunities for cancer patients and a new challenge for internists and general practitioners.

The treatment of cancer patients with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, combined therapy anti-PD-1/PD-L1 with anti-CTLA-4) has without doubt been a significant breakthrough in the field of oncology in recent years and constitutes a major step forward as a novel type of immunotherapy in the treatment of cancer. ICIs have contributed to a significant improvement in the outcome of treatment and prognosis of patients with different types of malignancy. With the expansion of the use of ICIs, it is expected that caregivers will face new challenges, namely, they will have to manage the adverse side effects associated with the use of these drugs. New treatment options pose new challenges not only for oncologists but also for specialists in other clinical fields, including general practitioners (GPs). They also endorse the need for taking a holistic approach to the patient, which is a principle widely recognized in oncology and especially relevant in the case of the expanding use of ICIs, which may give rise to a wide variety of organ complications resulting from treatment. Knowledge and awareness of the spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) will allow doctors to qualify patients for treatment more appropriately, prevent complications, correctly recognize, and ultimately treat them. Additionally, patients with more non-specific symptoms would be expected, in the first instance, to consult their general practitioners, as complications may appear even after the termination of treatment and do not always proceed in line with disease progression. Dealing with any iatrogenic complications, will not only be the remit of oncologists but because of the likelihood that specific organs may be affected, is likely to extend also to specialists in various fields of internal medicine. These specialists, e.g., endocrinologists, dermatologists, pulmonologists, and gastroenterologists, are likely to receive referrals for patients suffering from specific types of adverse events or will be asked to provide care in cases requiring hospitalization of patients with complications in their field of expertise. In view of these considerations, we believe that there is an urgent need for multidisciplinary teamwork in the treatment of cancer patients undergoing immunotherapy and suffering the consequent adverse reactions to treatment

Natural Host Genetic Resistance to Lentiviral CNS Disease: A Neuroprotective MHC Class I Allele in SIV-Infected Macaques

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection frequently causes neurologic disease even with anti-retroviral treatment. Although associations between MHC class I alleles and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) have been reported, the role MHC class I alleles play in restricting development of HIV-induced organ-specific diseases, including neurologic disease, has not been characterized. This study examined the relationship between expression of the MHC class I allele Mane-A*10 and development of lentiviral-induced central nervous system (CNS) disease using a well-characterized simian immunodeficiency (SIV)/pigtailed macaque model. The risk of developing CNS disease (SIV encephalitis) was 2.5 times higher for animals that did not express the MHC class I allele Mane-A*10 (P = 0.002; RR = 2.5). Animals expressing the Mane-A*10 allele had significantly lower amounts of activated macrophages, SIV RNA, and neuronal dysfunction in the CNS than Mane-A*10 negative animals (P<0.001). Mane-A*10 positive animals with the highest CNS viral burdens contained SIV gag escape mutants at the Mane-A*10-restricted KP9 epitope in the CNS whereas wild type KP9 sequences dominated in the brain of Mane-A*10 negative animals with comparable CNS viral burdens. These concordant findings demonstrate that particular MHC class I alleles play major neuroprotective roles in lentiviral-induced CNS disease

The influence of different anticoagulants and sample preparation methods on measurement of mCD14 on bovine monocytes and polymorphonuclear neutrophil leukocytes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Membrane-CD14 (mCD14) is expressed on the surface of monocytes, macrophages and polymorphonuclear neutrophil leukocytes (PMN). mCD14 acts as a co-receptor along with Toll like receptor 4 (TLR 4) and MD-2 for the detection of lipopolysaccharide (LPS). However, studies using different sample preparation methods and anticoagulants have reported different levels of mCD14 on the surface of monocytes and neutrophils. In this study, the influence of various anticoagulants and processing methods on measurement of mCD14 on monocytes and neutrophils was examined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Whole blood samples were collected in vacutainer tubes containing either sodium heparin (HEPARIN), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) or sodium citrate (CITRATE). mCD14 on neutrophils and monocytes in whole blood samples or isolated cells was measured by the method of flow cytometry using fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled monoclonal antibody. There was a significant difference (<it>p </it>< 0.05) in the mean channel fluorescence intensity (MFI) of mCD14 on neutrophils in whole blood samples anticoagulated with HEPARIN (MFI = 64.77) in comparison with those in whole blood samples anticoagulated with either EDTA (MFI = 38.25) or CITRATE (MFI = 43.7). The MFI of mCD14 on monocytes in whole blood samples anticoagulted with HEPARIN (MFI = 206.90) was significantly higher than the MFI in whole blood samples anticoagulated with EDTA (MFI = 149.37) but similar to that with CITRATE (MFI = 162.55). There was no significant difference in the percentage of whole blood neutrophils or monocytes expressing mCD14 irrespective of type of anticoagulant used. However, MFI of mCD14 on monocytes was about 3.2-folds (HEPARIN), 3.9-folds (EDTA) or 3.7 folds (CITRATE) higher than those on neutrophils. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in mCD14 levels between unprocessed whole blood monocytes and monocytes in peripheral blood mononuclear cell preparation. Conversely, a highly significant difference was observed in mCD14 between unprocessed whole blood neutrophils and isolated neutrophils (<it>p </it>< 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>From these results, it is suggested that sodium heparin should be the preferred anticoagulant for use in the reliable quantification of the surface expression of mCD14. Furthermore, measurement of mCD14 is best carried out in whole blood samples, both for neutrophils and monocytes.</p

Differential Expression of CD163 on Monocyte Subsets in Healthy and HIV-1 Infected Individuals

CD163, a haptoglobin-hemoglobin (Hp-Hb) scavenger receptor, expressed by monocytes and macrophages, is important in resolution of inflammation. Age-related non-AIDS co-morbidities in HIV-infected individuals, particularly dementia and cardiovascular disease, result in part from effects of HIV-1 infection on monocyte and macrophage biology. CD163 co-expression on CD14+CD16++ monocytes has been proposed as a useful biomarker for HIV-1 disease progression and the presence of HIV associated dementia. Here we investigated CD163 expression on monocyte subsets ex vivo, on cultured macrophages, and soluble in plasma, in the setting of HIV-1 infection. Whole blood immunophenotyping revealed CD163 expression on CD14++CD16- monocytes but not on CD14+CD16++ monocytes (P = 0.004), supported by CD163 mRNA levels. Incubation with M-CSF induced CD163 protein expression on CD14+CD16++ monocytes to the same extent as CD14++CD16− monocytes. CD163 expression on CD14++CD16+ monocytes from HIV-infected subjects was significantly higher than from uninfected individuals, with a trend towards increased expression on CD14++CD16− monocytes (P = 0.019 and 0.069 respectively), which is accounted for by HIV-1 therapy including protease inhibitors. Shedding of CD163 was shown to predominantly occur from the CD14++CD16− subset after Ficoll isolation and LPS stimulation. Soluble CD163 concentration in plasma from HIV-1 infected donors was similar to HIV-1 uninfected donors. Monocyte CD163 expression in HIV-1 infected patients showed a complicated relationship with classical measures of disease progression. Our findings clarify technical issues regarding CD163 expression on monocyte subsets and further elucidates its role in HIV-associated inflammation by demonstrating that CD163 is readily lost from CD14++CD16− monocytes and induced in pro-inflammatory CD14+CD16++ monocytes by M-CSF. Our data show that all monocyte subsets are potentially capable of differentiating into CD163-expressing anti-inflammatory macrophages given appropriate stimuli. Levels of CD163 expression on monocytes may be a potential biomarker reflecting efforts by the immune system to resolve immune activation and inflammation in HIV-infected individuals