Macrophages orchestrate innate immunity by phagocytosing pathogens and coordinating inflammatory responses 1 . Effective defence requires the host to discriminate between different pathogens. The specificity of innate immune recognition in Drosophila is mediated by the Toll family of receptors 2,3 ; Toll mediates anti-fungal responses, whereas 18-wheeler mediates anti-bacterial defence 4-6 . A large number of Toll homologues have been identified in mammals, and Toll-like receptor 4 is critical in responses to Gram-negative bacteria 7-11 . Here we show that Toll-like receptor 2 is recruited specifically to macrophage phagosomes containing yeast, and that a point mutation in the receptor abrogates inflammatory responses to yeast and Gram-positive bacteria, but not to Gram-negative bacteria. Thus, during the phagocytosis of pathogens, two classes of innate immune receptors cooperate to mediate host defence: phagocytic receptors, such as the mannose receptor, signal particle internalization, and the Toll-like receptors sample the contents of the vacuole and trigger an inflammatory response appropriate to defence against the specific organism.
Macrophages orchestrate innate immunity by phagocytosing pathogens and coordinating inflammatory responses. Effective defence requires the host to discriminate between different pathogens. The specificity of innate immune recognition in Drosophila is mediated by the Toll family of receptors; Toll mediates anti-fungal responses, whereas 18-wheeler mediates anti-bacterial defence. A large number of Toll homologues have been identified in mammals, and Toll-like receptor 4 is critical in responses to Gram-negative bacteria. Here we show that Toll-like receptor 2 is recruited specifically to macrophage phagosomes containing yeast, and that a point mutation in the receptor abrogates inflammatory responses to yeast and Gram-positive bacteria, but not to Gram-negative bacteria. Thus, during the phagocytosis of pathogens, two classes of innate immune receptors cooperate to mediate host defence: phagocytic receptors, such as the mannose receptor, signal particle internalization, and the Toll-like receptors sample the contents of the vacuole and trigger an inflammatory response appropriate to defence against the specific organism.
Ipilimumab, an antibody that enhances T-cell activation, may augment immunogenicity of tumor cells that are injured by radiation therapy. We hypothesized that patients with melanoma brain metastasis treated with both ipilimumab and radiotherapy would have improved overall survival, and that the sequence of treatments may affect disease control in the brain. We analyzed the clinical and radiographic records of melanoma patients with brain metastases who were treated with whole brain radiation therapy or stereotactic radiosurgery between 2005 and 2012. The hazard ratios for survival were estimated to assess outcomes as a function of ipilimumab use and radiation type. Seventy patients were identified, 33 of whom received ipilimumab and 37 who did not. The patients who received ipilimumab had a censored median survival of 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 8.1–25.5), compared with 5.3 months (95% confidence interval 4.0–7.6) for patients who did not receive ipilimumab. Ipilimumab and stereotactic radiosurgery were each significant predictors of improved overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.43 and 0.45, with P = 0.005 and 0.008, respectively). Four of 10 evaluable patients (40.0%) who received ipilimumab prior to radiotherapy demonstrated a partial response to radiotherapy, compared with two of 22 evaluable patients (9.1%) who did not receive ipilimumab. Ipilimumab is associated with a significantly reduced risk of death in patients with melanoma brain metastases who underwent radiotherapy, and this finding supports the need for multimodality therapy to optimize patient outcomes. Prospective studies are needed and are underway.
Background Adaptive magnetic resonance imaging‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) can escalate dose to tumors while minimizing dose to normal tissue. We evaluated outcomes of inoperable pancreatic cancer patients treated using MRgRT with and without dose escalation. Methods We reviewed 44 patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer treated with MRgRT. Treatments included conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, and stereotactic body radiation therapy. Patients were stratified into high‐dose (biologically effective dose [BED 10 ] >70) and standard‐dose groups (BED 10 ≤70). Overall survival (OS), freedom from local failure (FFLF) and freedom from distant failure (FFDF) were evaluated using Kaplan‐Meier method. Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of OS. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was assessed for 6 weeks after completion of RT. Results Median follow‐up was 17 months. High‐dose patients (n = 24, 55%) had statistically significant improvement in 2‐year OS (49% vs 30%, P = 0.03) and trended towards significance for 2‐year FFLF (77% vs 57%, P = 0.15) compared to standard‐dose patients (n = 20, 45%). FFDF at 18 months in high‐dose vs standard‐dose groups was 24% vs 48%, respectively ( P = 0.92). High‐dose radiation (HR: 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21‐0.94; P = 0.03) and duration of induction chemotherapy (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72‐0.98; P = 0.03) were significantly correlated with OS on univariate analysis but neither factor was independently predictive on multivariate analysis. Grade 3+ GI toxicity occurred in three patients in the standard‐dose group and did not occur in the high‐dose group. Conclusions Patients treated with dose‐escalated MRgRT demonstrated improved OS. Prospective evaluation of high‐dose RT regimens with standardized treatment parameters in inoperable pancreatic cancer patients is warranted.
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) provide recommended management for patients with SCLC, including diagnosis, primary treatment, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. This selection for the journal focuses on metastatic (known as extensive-stage) SCLC, which is more common than limited-stage SCLC. Systemic therapy alone can palliate symptoms and prolong survival in most patients with extensive-stage disease. Smoking cessation counseling and intervention should be strongly promoted in patients with SCLC and other high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. The “Summary of the Guidelines Updates” section in the SCLC algorithm outlines the most recent revisions for the 2022 update, which are described in greater detail in this revised Discussion text.
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines ®) are a statement of consensus of the authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines ® Insights highlight important changes in the NCCN Guidelines ® recommendations from previous versions. Colored markings in the algorithm show changes and the discussion aims to further understanding of these changes by summarizing salient portions of the panel's discussion, including the literature reviewed. The NCCN Guidelines Insights do not represent the full NCCN Guidelines; further, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN ®) makes no representation or warranties of any kind regarding the content, use, or application of the NCCN Guidelines and NCCN Guidelines Insights and disclaims any responsibility for their applications or use in any way. The full and most current version of these NCCN Guidelines is available at NCCN.org.
Purpose: Cancer treatment is limited by inaccurate predictors of patient-specific therapeutic response. Therefore, some patients are exposed to unnecessary side effects and delays in starting effective therapy. A clinical tool that predicts treatment sensitivity for individual patients is needed. Experimental Design: Patient-derived cancer organoids were derived across multiple histologies. The histologic characteristics, mutation profile, clonal structure, and response to chemotherapy and radiation were assessed using bright-field and optical metabolic imaging on spheroid and single-cell levels, respectively. Results: We demonstrate that patient-derived cancer organoids represent the cancers from which they were derived, including key histologic and molecular features. These cultures were generated from numerous cancers, various biopsy sample types, and in different clinical settings. Next-generation sequencing reveals the presence of subclonal populations within the organoid cultures. These cultures allow for the detection of clonal heterogeneity with a greater sensitivity than bulk tumor sequencing. Optical metabolic imaging of these organoids provides cell-level quantification of treatment response and tumor heterogeneity allowing for resolution of therapeutic differences between patient samples. Using this technology, we prospectively predict treatment response for a patient with metastatic colorectal cancer. Conclusions: These studies add to the literature demonstrating feasibility to grow clinical patient-derived organotypic cultures for treatment effectiveness testing. Together, these culture methods and response assessment techniques hold great promise to predict treatment sensitivity for patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy and/or radiation.
Radiation therapy (RT) is an essential component of effective cancer care and is used across nearly all cancer types. The delivery of RT is becoming more precise through rapid advances in both computing and imaging. The direct integration of magnetic resonance imag-ing (MRI) with linear accelerators represents an exciting development with the potential todramatically impact cancer research and treatment. These impacts extend beyond improved imaging and dose deposition. Real-time MRI-guided RT is actively transforming the work flows and capabilities of virtually every aspect of RT. It has the opportunity to change entirely the delivery methods and response assessments of numerous malignancies. This review intends to approach the topic of MRI-based RT guidance from a vendor neutral and international perspective. It also aims to provide an *
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.