METHOD: An electrical cell-substrate impedance-sensing tool was utilized to study the real-time cell-cell barrier or morphological changes in response to the virus infection.
RESULTS: Herpes simplex virus, regardless of type (i.e., 1 or 2), reduced the cell-cell barrier resistance almost immediately after virus addition to endothelial cells, with negligible involvement of cell-matrix adhesion changes. There is no exclusivity in the infection ability of endothelial cells. From 30 h after HSV infection, there was an increase in cell membrane capacitance with a subsequent loss of cell-matrix adhesion capability, indicating a viability loss of the infected endothelial cells.
CONCLUSION: This study shows for the first time that destruction of human brain micro-vascular endothelial cells as an in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier could be an alternative invasion mechanism during herpes simplex virus infection.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 57-year-old man presented to our orthopedic outpatient department with 3-months history of an unusual painful swelling at the operated area following DFO. The leakage of joint fluid from the penetrated suprapatellar pouch was assumed to be the reason for this complication.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall aim of this case report is to provide a lesson to budding surgeons who might experience a similar situation that cannot be easily explained, like the unexpected complication in the present case.
METHODS: Smaller micro tissues (˂150 μm in diameter) mixed with Matrigel were engrafted subcutaneously into NSG mice to generate the passage 1 (P1) patient-derived xenograft. The micro tumours from P1 patient-derived xenograft were then excised and orthotopically xenografted into another batch of NSG mice to generate a metastatic colorectal cancer patient-derived xenograft, P2. Haematoxylin and eosin and immunohistochemistry staining were performed to compare the characters between patient-derived xenograft tumours and primary tumours.
RESULTS: About 16 out of 18 P1 xenograft models successfully grew a tumour for 50.8 ± 5.1 days (success rate 89.9%). Six out of eight P1 xenograft models originating from metastatic patients successfully grew tumours in the colon and metastasized to liver or lung in the NSG recipients for 60.9 ± 4.5 days (success rate 75%). Histological examination of both P1 and P2 xenografts closely resembled the histological architecture of the original patients' tumours. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed similar biomarker expression levels, including CDH17, Ki-67, active β-catenin, Ki-67 and α smooth muscle actin when compared with the original patients' tumours. The stromal components that support the growth of patient-derived xenograft tumours were of murine origin.
CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic patient-derived xenograft mouse model could be established with shorter time and higher success rate. Although the patient-derived xenograft tumours were supported by the stromal cells of murine origin, they retained the dominant characters of the original patient tumours.
METHODS: Data were retrospectively extracted from all the Chemotherapy Return Forms in 2016, which is a compulsory documentation accompanying each return of parenteral chemotherapy regimen. The following data were extracted: patient's diagnosis, gender, location of treatment (i.e. ward/daycare clinic), start date of chemotherapy regimen, type of cytotoxic drug returned, dose of cytotoxic drug returned, number of cytotoxic drug preparations returned and reason for return as well as whether the returned cytotoxic drug preparations could be re-dispensed. The cost of wastage was calculated based on the cost per mg (or per unit) of the particular returned cytotoxic drug.
RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine cases of returned chemotherapy regimen comprising of 231 parenteral cytotoxic drug preparations were analysed. The total cost of returned chemotherapy regimen for 2016 was €3632, with €756 (20.8%) worth of chemotherapy regimens returned due to preventable reasons and €2876 (79.2%) worth of chemotherapy regimens returned due to non-preventable reasons. Approximately 50% of cases returned chemotherapy regimen were due to deterioration of patient's clinical condition and another 24.5% of cases of returned chemotherapy regimen were attributed to adverse drug reactions.
CONCLUSION: Wastage associated to non-preventable reasons such as adverse drug reactions and preventable causes like refusal of patients can be further reduced by using newer healthcare innovations and establishment of written institutional protocols or standard operating procedures as references for in-charge healthcare personnel when cytotoxic drug-related issues occur. Adoption of cost-saving strategies that have been proven by studies could further improve current cost containment strategies.