scholarly journals GONADOTROPIN STIMULATION ALTERS HUMAN MATERNAL UTERINE IMMUNE CELL NUMBER AND FUNCTION DURING THE WINDOW OF IMPLANTATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 116 (3) ◽  
pp. e79
Author(s):  
Jessica R. Kanter ◽  
Sneha Mani ◽  
Scott Gordon ◽  
Ju Young Park ◽  
Dan Huh ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. 1429-1435 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Gulley ◽  
Jennifer Marté ◽  
Christopher R. Heery ◽  
Ravi A. Madan ◽  
Seth M. Steinberg ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppina Bonanno ◽  
Annabella Procoli ◽  
Andrea Mariotti ◽  
Maria Corallo ◽  
Alessandro Perillo ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonya Marshall-Gradisnik ◽  
Rachel Green ◽  
Ekua Brenu ◽  
Robert Weatherby

AbstractAndrogenic anabolic steroids (AAS) are synthetic derivatives of the male hormone testosterone. AAS are used by athletes and recreational users of all ages to enhance their athletic performance and/or physical appearance. While several adverse effects of AAS abuse have been described, their effect on the immune system has not been clearly elucidated. The literature generally indicates that supraphysiologic doses of AAS with an intact steroid nucleus are immunosuppressive, that is they reduce immune cell number and function. While those with alterations to the steroid nucleus are immunostimulatory as they induce the proliferation of T cells and other immune cells. Specifically, several common AAS have been shown to adversely influence lymphocyte differentiation and proliferation, antibody production, Natural Killer Cytotoxic activity and the production of certain cytokines, thereby altering the immune reaction. These effects may be profound and long lasting depending on the dosing regime, types or combinations of AAS used and the extent and duration of AAS abuse. Nevertheless, the effects of long term use of supraphysiologic doses of AAS on the immune system remain uncertain.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 277
Author(s):  
Wanxue He ◽  
Kun Xiao ◽  
Min Fang ◽  
Lixin Xie

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artur César Fassoni ◽  
Ingo Roeder ◽  
Ingmar Glauche

AbstractRecent clinical findings in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) patients suggest that the number and function of immune effector cells are modulated by Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) treatment. There is further evidence that the success or failure of treatment cessation at least partly depends on the patient’s immunological constitution. Here, we propose a general ODE model to functionally describe the interactions between immune effector cells with leukemic cells during the TKI treatment of CML. In total, we consider 20 different sub-models, which assume different functional interactions between immune effector and leukemic cells. We show that quantitative criteria, which are purely based on the quality of model fitting, are not able to identify optimal models. On the other hand, the application of qualitative criteria based on a dynamical system framework allowed us to identify nine of those models as more suitable than the others to describe clinically observed patterns and, thereby, to derive conclusion about the underlying mechanisms. Additionally, including aspects of early CML onset, we can demonstrate that certain critical parameters, such as the strength of immune response or leukemia proliferation rate, need to change during CML growth prior to diagnosis, leading to bifurcations that alter the attractor landscape. Finally, we show that the crucial parameters determining the outcome of treatment cessation are not identifiable with tumor load data only, thereby highlighting the need to measure immune cell number and function to properly derive mathematical models with predictive power.MSC Classification: 92B05, 37N25, 34C60, 37G35


2002 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1941-1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOEL B. MITCHELL ◽  
JONATHAN P. DUGAS ◽  
BRIAN K. MCFARLIN ◽  
MATTHEW J. NELSON

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 231-232
Author(s):  
A. Najm ◽  
A. Alunno ◽  
X. Mariette ◽  
B. Terrier ◽  
G. De Marco ◽  
...  

Background:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic is a global health problem. Beside the specific pathogenic effect of SARS-CoV-2, incompletely understood deleterious and aberrant host immune responses play critical roles in severe disease. Rheumatologists have the best experience of studying and treating these complicated hyperinflammatory processes.Objectives:To summarize the available information on pathophysiology of COVID-19.Methods:As part of a EULAR taskforce, two systematic literature reviews were performed one on pathophysiology and one on immunomodulatory therapies. Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies according to the following PICO framework: P (population): patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection; I (intervention): any intervention/no intervention; C (comparator): any comparator; O (outcome) any clinical or serological outcome including but not limited to immune cell phenotype and function and serum cytokine concentration. The results pertaining to pathophysiology of COVID-19 are presented here.Results:Of the 55496 records yielded, 85 articles were eligible for inclusion. Included studies were at variable risk of bias and exploring various aspects of disease pathogenesis from immune to non-immune cells (Table 1). Pro-inflammatory cytokines’ expression including IL-6, was increased, especially in severe COVID-19, although not as high as other states with severe systemic inflammation. Innate and adaptative immune cell compartments were differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection: neutrophils displayed an immature differentiation state and also increased neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) formation. Dendritic cell number was reduced and classical monocytes was increased although displaying a reduced expression of HLA-DR. The lymphoid compartment was also affected: lymphopenia was present with a reduced number of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes and more frequent PD1+CD8+ T cells corresponding to an exhausted phenotype. Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection showed a high variability across individuals and disease spectrum. Multiparametric algorithms showed variable diagnostic performances in predicting survival, hospitalization, disease progression or severity, and mortality. Differences in SARS-CoV-2 manifestations in adults and children were highlighted.Conclusion:Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infection affects both innate and adaptative immune responses in a variable way, according to both disease severity and individual parameters. This SLR informs the EULAR points to consider on pathophysiology and use of immunomodulatory therapies in COVID-19.Table 1.Studies on SARS-CoV-2 infection pathogenesisResearch questionNCytokines profile7Immune profile18Algorithm17Children3Comorbidities1Endothelial dysfunction and platelets8Gut and microbiota3Genetics and variants8Histology7Antibodies profiles8Viral load and immune response4Interferon3Immunosenecsnce3Total90**Some manuscripts were including in several research questions. Total number of studies included n=85.Disclosure of Interests:Aurelie Najm Speakers bureau: BMS, Consultant of: BMS, Alessia Alunno: None declared, Xavier Mariette Speakers bureau: BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Servier and UCB, Consultant of: BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Servier and UCB, Benjamin Terrier Speakers bureau: Roche, Chugai, Vifor Pharma, GSK, AstraZeneca, Terumo BCT, LFB and Grifols, Consultant of: Roche, Chugai, Vifor Pharma, GSK, AstraZeneca, Terumo BCT, LFB and Grifols, Gabriele De Marco: None declared, Laura Mason: None declared, Jenny Emmel: None declared, Dennis McGonagle Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Pedro M Machado Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB.


Diabetes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 222-OR
Author(s):  
MICHAEL J. NASH ◽  
TAYLOR K. SODERBORG ◽  
RACHEL C. JANSSEN ◽  
ERIC M. PIETRAS ◽  
JACOB E. FRIEDMAN

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 823
Author(s):  
Jian Tan ◽  
Duan Ni ◽  
Rosilene V. Ribeiro ◽  
Gabriela V. Pinget ◽  
Laurence Macia

Cell survival, proliferation and function are energy-demanding processes, fuelled by different metabolic pathways. Immune cells like any other cells will adapt their energy production to their function with specific metabolic pathways characteristic of resting, inflammatory or anti-inflammatory cells. This concept of immunometabolism is revolutionising the field of immunology, opening the gates for novel therapeutic approaches aimed at altering immune responses through immune metabolic manipulations. The first part of this review will give an extensive overview on the metabolic pathways used by immune cells. Diet is a major source of energy, providing substrates to fuel these different metabolic pathways. Protein, lipid and carbohydrate composition as well as food additives can thus shape the immune response particularly in the gut, the first immune point of contact with food antigens and gastrointestinal tract pathogens. How diet composition might affect gut immunometabolism and its impact on diseases will also be discussed. Finally, the food ingested by the host is also a source of energy for the micro-organisms inhabiting the gut lumen particularly in the colon. The by-products released through the processing of specific nutrients by gut bacteria also influence immune cell activity and differentiation. How bacterial metabolites influence gut immunometabolism will be covered in the third part of this review. This notion of immunometabolism and immune function is recent and a deeper understanding of how lifestyle might influence gut immunometabolism is key to prevent or treat diseases.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Newsholme

AbstractVarious nutrients can change cell structure, cellular metabolism, and cell function which is particularly important for cells of the immune system as nutrient availability is associated with the activation and function of diverse immune subsets. The most important nutrients for immune cell function and fate appear to be glucose, amino acids, fatty acids, and vitamin D. This perspective will describe recently published information describing the mechanism of action of prominent nutritional intervention agents where evidence exists as to their action and potency.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document