Schistosomiasis is the second most common parasitic disease post Malaria around the world. Praziquantel (PZQ) is known as the most efficient anti- schistosomal drug but has no anti-fibrotic effect. Metformin (Met) is a well-known drug for type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to evaluate the role of Met as anti-schistosomal and anti-fibrotic agents alone or in combination with PZQ treatment. Forty male CD1 mice were divided into four groups (n=10 mice) as following; the first group (Gp1) was served as a negative control. Gp2, Gp3, Gp4, and Gp5 were infected with (60-80) S. mansoni cercariae. After a month of infection, Gp3 was administered orally with PZQ (500 mg/Kg) for 2 consecutive days. Gp4 was administered orally with Met (150 mg/Kg) for 15 consecutive days, and Gp5 was orally administered with PZQ followed by Met for 15 consecutive days at the same doses as in Gp 3 and 4. The results showed that PZQ had potent worms and egg reduction in liver and intestine tissues with no anti-fibrotic effect of the granuloma formation. However, Met or PZQ/Met treatment postinfection led to a reduction in egg count in both liver and intestine tissues with a significant reduction in granuloma site. Treatment of S. mansoni-infected mice with Met or PZQ/Met ameliorated the hematological and biochemical alterations induced by S. mansoni infection. Collectively, Met has no anti-schistosomal activity but led to a reduction in egg deposition and showed an anti-fibrotic effect on granulomatous development either when used alone or in combination with PZQ treatment. This study shed light on the possible role of Met as an anti-fibrotic agent when administered with PZQ for S. mansoni infected humans.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.