METHODS: We used transmission electron microscopy (TEM) to investigate post-mortem tissue sections of patients with clinical melioidosis to identify the localisation of a recently identified gut microbiome, B. pseudomallei within host cells. The intranuclear presence of B. pseudomallei was confirmed using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) of experimentally infected guinea pig spleen tissues and Live Z-stack, and ImageJ analysis of fluorescence microscopy analysis of in vitro infection of A549 human lung epithelial cells.
RESULTS: TEM investigations revealed intranuclear localization of B. pseudomallei in cells of infected human lung and guinea pig spleen tissues. We also found that B. pseudomallei induced actin polymerization following infection of A549 human lung epithelial cells. Infected A549 lung epithelial cells using 3D-Laser scanning confocal microscopy (LSCM) and immunofluorescence microscopy confirmed the intranuclear localization of B. pseudomallei.
CONCLUSION: B. pseudomallei was found within the nuclear compartment of host cells. The nucleus may play a role as an occult or transient niche for persistence of intracellular pathogens, potentially leading to recurrrent episodes or recrudescence of infection.
AREAS COVERED: This review examines the state of the art in passive (processing and formulation) and active (targeting ligand and receptor binding) technologies in association with the use of nanocarrier to combat lung cancer. It highlights routes to equip nanocarrier with targeting ligands as a function of the chemistry of participating biomolecules and challenges in inhalational nanoproduct development and clinical applications. Both research and review articles were examined using the Scopus, Elsevier, Web of Science, Chemical Abstracts, Medline, CASREACT, CHEMCATS, and CHEMLIST database with the majority of information retrieved between those of 2000-2018.
EXPERT COMMENTARY: The therapeutic efficacy of targeting ligand-decorated nanocarriers needs to be demonstrated in vivo in the form of finished inhalational products. Their inhalation efficiency and medical responses require further examination. Clinical application of inhaled nanocancer chemotherapeutics is premature.
METHODS: EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.
FINDINGS: Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty Sprague Dawley rats (3-monthold, 200 to 300 gm) were randomly divided into six groups, namely control (C), 4 weeks diabetes mellitus (DM1), 8 weeks DM (DM2) and three DM1 groups (VD1, VD2, and VD3) who received Vitamin D doses of 0.125, 0.25 and 0.50 μg/kg BW, respectively. After 4 weeks, daily VD was administered intraperitoneally for 30 days. Lung tissues were taken for IL- 6, MCP-1, NFKB and CD68 mRNA expression analysis and paraffin embedding. Immunohistochemical staining against CD68 and MCP-1 was conducted. Data were analysed using one-way ANOVA. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: DM2 group represented significantly higher IL6, MCP1, NFKB and CD68 mRNA expression than Control group (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, VD2 and VD3 groups revealed significantly lower mRNA expression of IL-6, MCP1, NFKB and CD68 than DM2 (p < 0.05). Immunostaining revealed the spreading of MCP1 protein expression in lung tissue along with macrophage infiltration in the DM2 group, which was reduced in the VD2 and the VD3 groups.
CONCLUSION: VD shows a protective effect on diabetesinduced lung damage by regulating inflammation factors.