Combination with tomatidine improves the potency of posaconazole against Trypanosoma cruzi

Azoles such as posaconazole (Posa) are highly potent against Trypanosoma cruzi. However, when tested in chronic Chagas disease patients, a high rate of relapse after Posa treatment was observed. It appears that inhibition of T. cruzi cytochrome CYP51, the target of azoles, does not deliver sterile cure in monotherapy. Looking for suitable combination partners of azoles, we have selected a set of inhibitors of sterol and sphingolipid biosynthetic enzymes. A small-scale phenotypic screening was conducted in vitro against the proliferative forms of T. cruzi, extracellular epimastigotes and intracellular amastigotes. Against the intracellular, clinically relevant forms, four out of 15 tested compounds presented higher or equal activity as benznidazole (Bz), with EC50 values </=2.2 muM. Ro48-8071, an inhibitor of lanosterol synthase (ERG7), and the steroidal alkaloid tomatidine (TH), an inhibitor of C-24 sterol methyltransferase (ERG6), exhibited the highest potency and selectivity indices (SI = 12 and 115, respectively). Both were directed to combinatory assays using fixed-ratio protocols with Posa, Bz, and fexinidazole. The combination of TH with Posa displayed a synergistic profile against amastigotes, with a mean SigmaFICI value of 0.2. In vivo assays using an acute mouse model of T. cruzi infection demonstrated lack of antiparasitic activity of TH alone in doses ranging from 0.5 to 5 mg/kg. As observed in vitro, the best combo proportion in vivo was the ratio 3 TH:1 Posa. The combination of Posa at 1.25 mpk plus TH at 3.75 mpk displayed suppression of peak parasitemia of 80% and a survival rate of 60% in the acute infection model, as compared to 20% survival for Posa at 1.25 mpk alone and 40% for Posa at 10 mpk alone. These initial results indicate a potential for the combination of posaconazole with tomatidine against T. cruzi

Influence of the topology on the dynamics of a complex network of HIV/AIDS epidemic models

In this paper, we propose an original complex network model for an epidemic problem in an heterogeneous geographical area. The complex network is constructed by coupling nonidentical instances of a HIV/AIDS epidemiological model for which a disease-free equilibrium and an endemic equilibrium can coexist. After proving the existence of a positively invariant region for the solutions of the complex network problem, we investigate the effect of the coupling on the dynamics of the network, and establish the existence of a unique disease-free equilibrium for the whole network, which is globally asymptotically stable. We prove the existence of an optimal topology that minimizes the level of infected individuals, and apply the theoretical results to the case of the Cape Verde archipelago.This research was partially supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) within projects UID/MAT/04106/2019 (CIDMA) and PTDC/EEI-AUT/2933/2014 (TOCCATTA), co-funded by FEDER funds through COMPETE2020 – Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalizac¸ao (POCI) and by national funds (FCT). Silva is also supported by national funds (OE), through FCT, I.P., in the scope of the framework contract foreseen in the numbers 4, 5 and 6 of the article 23, of the Decree-Law 57/2016, of August 29, changed by Law 57/2017, of July 19.publishe

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