Expression of iNOS, CD163 and ARG-1 taken as M1 and M2 markers of microglial polarization in human glioblastoma and the surrounding normal parenchyma

Microglia and macrophages appear to be the most common cells in the GBM microenvironment. In the present study we investigated the status of macrophages/microglia activation in surgical specimens from 41 patients diagnosed with grade IV GBM. For each patient we analyzed both the center of tumor and the parenchyma surrounding the tumor. The specimens were stained for: i) IBA1, a 17-kDa EF hand protein specifically expressed in microglia/macrophages ii) CD163, a cell surface antigen associated with M2 phenotype; iii) iNOS, taken as a functional marker of M1 phenotype, and iv) ARG-I, taken as a functional marker of M2 phenotype. Staining was scored in a double-blinded score on a scale from 0 to 5. Our results suggest that CD163 expression is higher within the tumor than in surrounding periphery in both male and female patients; while iNOS is higher within the tumor in males, no significant difference was found for ARG-1. In addition, analyzing the data in TGCA database, we found that CD163 expression was significantly and inversely correlated with mean survival times, with average survival times ranging from 448 days in patients having low expression, to 319 in mid, and 353 in patients with high CD163 expressing tumors. In contrast, no significant association was found between survival time and ARG-1 or iNOS expression

Molecular, clinical, and muscle studies in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) associated with novel variant CCG expansions

We assessed clinical, molecular and muscle histopathological features in five unrelated Italian DM1 patients carrying novel variant pathological expansions containing CCG interruptions within the 3'-end of the CTG array at the DMPK locus, detected by bidirectional triplet primed PCR (TP-PCR) and sequencing. Three patients had a negative DM1 testing by routine long-range PCR; the other two patients were identified among 100 unrelated DM1 cases and re-evaluated to estimate the prevalence of variant expansions. The overall prevalence was 4.8 % in our study cohort. There were no major clinical differences between variant and non-variant DM1 patients, except for cognitive involvement. Muscle RNA-FISH, immunofluorescence for MBNL1 and RT-PCR analysis documented the presence of ribonuclear inclusions, their co-localization with MBNL1, and an aberrant splicing pattern involved in DM1 pathogenesis, without any obvious differences between variant and non-variant DM1 patients. Therefore, this study shows that the CCG interruptions at the 3'-end of expanded DMPK alleles do not produce qualitative effects on the RNA-mediated toxic gain-of-function in DM1 muscle tissues. Finally, our results support the conclusion that different patterns of CCG interruptions within the CTG array could modulate the DM1 clinical phenotype, variably affecting the mutational dynamics of the variant repeat

Cytomegalovirus infection management in solid organ transplant recipients across European centers in the time of molecular diagnostics: An ESGICH survey

Background: Scant information is available about how transplant centers are managing their use of quantitative molecular testing (QNAT) assays for active cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection monitoring in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The current study was aimed at gathering information on current practices in the management of CMV infection across European centers in the era of molecular testing assays. Methods: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey study was conducted by the European Study Group of Infections in Immunocompromised Hosts (ESGICH) of the Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID). The invitation and a weekly reminder with a personal link to an Internet service provider (https://es.surveymonkey.com/) was sent to transplant physicians, transplant infectious diseases specialists, and clinical virologists working at 340 European transplant centers. Results: Of the 1181 specialists surveyed, a total of 173 responded (14.8%): 73 transplant physicians, 57 transplant infectious diseases specialists, and 43 virologists from 173 institutions located at 23 different countries. The majority of centers used QNAT assays for active CMV infection monitoring. Most centers preferred commercially available real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays over laboratory-developed procedures for quantifying CMV DNA load in whole blood or plasma. Use of a wide variety of DNA extraction platforms and RT-PCR assays was reported. All programs used antiviral prophylaxis, preemptive therapy, or both, according to current guidelines. However, the centers used different criteria for starting preemptive antiviral treatment, for monitoring systemic CMV DNA load, and for requesting genotypic assays to detect emerging CMV-resistant variants. Conclusions: Significant variation in CMV infection management in SOT recipients still remains across European centers in the era of molecular testing. International multicenter studies are required to achieve commutability of CMV testing and antiviral management procedures