AIM: To discuss the effects of phytoestrogenic-genistein on cathepsin K (CK) expression stimulated by interleukin-1α (IL-1α) in osteoclast-like cells (OCLs) . METHODS: The OCLs were isolated from tissue of human giant cell tumor of bone (GCT) . The cells treated with reagents were divided into 7 groups including control (treated with phenol red-free-DMEM), vehicle (treated with 1.2 nmol· L-1 IL- 1α), 10-10-10-6genistein, genistein+ ICI 182.780, and 17[β-estrodiol (17β-E2) group. The cells were treated with 1.2 nmol· L-1IL-1α after pre-treated with genistein or 17β-E2 for 48 h (excluded the control group) . Expression of CK wasdetermined by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blot in OCLs stimulated by IL-1α in the presence of genistein or 17[β-E2. RESULTS: The obvious increase of expression of CK by IL1α in vehicle group was noted in comparing with control group (P ＜ 0.01 ) . Genistein down-regulated CK gene expression stimulated by IL-1α at the transcription level in a dose-dependent manner (r = 0.68, P ＜ 0.01 ) .Genistein down-regulated CK protein expression stimulated by IL-1α also in a dose-dependent manner (r = 0.61,P ＜ 0.01 ). The effects of genistein were abrogated partly after treatment with the estrogen receptor antagonist ICI 182.780. CONCLUSION: Genistein inhibits CK expression stimulated by IL-1α partly through estrogen receptor in OCLs.

Objective:To delve deeply into the dynamic trajectories of cell subpopulations and the communication network among immune cell subgroups during the malignant progression of glioblastoma(GBM),and to endeavor to unearth key risk biomarkers in the GBM malignancy progression,so as to provide a more profound understanding for the treatment and prognosis of this disease by integrating tran-scriptomic data and clinical information of the GBM patients.Methods:Utilizing single-cell sequencing data analysis,we constructed a cell subgroup atlas during the malignant progression of GBM.The Mono-cle2 tool was employed to build dynamic progression trajectories of the tumor cell subgroups in GBM.Through gene enrichment analysis,we explored the biological processes enriched in genes that significant-ly changed with the malignancy progression of GBM tumor cell subpopulations.CellChat was used to identify the communication network between the different immune cell subgroups.Survival analysis helped in identifying risk molecular markers that impacted the patient prognosis during the malignant pro-gression of GBM.This methodological approach offered a comprehensive and detailed examination of the cellular and molecular dynamics within GBM,providing a robust framework for understanding the disease's progression and potential therapeutic targets.Results:The analysis of single-cell sequencing data identified 6 different cell types,including lymphocytes,pericytes,oligodendrocytes,macrophages,glioma cells,and microglia.The 27 151 cells in the single-cell dataset included 3 881 cells from the pa-tients with low-grade glioma(LGG),10 166 cells from the patients with newly diagnosed GBM,and 13 104 cells from the patients with recurrent glioma(rGBM).The pseudo-time analysis of the glioma cell subgroups indicated significant cellular heterogeneity during malignant progression.The cell interaction analysis of immune cell subgroups revealed the communication network among the different immune sub-groups in GBM malignancy,identifying 22 biologically significant ligand-receptor pairs across 12 key bio-logical pathways.Survival analysis had identified 8 genes related to the prognosis of the GBM patients,among which SERPINE1,COL6A1,SPP1,LTF,C1S,AEBP1,and SAA1L were high-risk genes in the GBM patients,and ABCC8 was low-risk genes in the GBM patients.These findings not only provided new theoretical bases for the treatment of GBM,but also offered fresh insights for the prognosis assessment and treatment decision-making for the GBM patients.Conclusion:This research comprehensively and pro-foundly reveals the dynamic changes in glioma cell subpopulations and the communication patterns among the immune cell subgroups during the malignant progression of GBM.These findings are of significant im-portance for understanding the complex biological processes of GBM,providing crucial new insights for precision medicine and treatment decisions in GBM.Through these studies,we hope to provide more ef-fective treatment options and more accurate prognostic assessments for the patients with GBM.

Objective:To investigate the clinical characteristics and risk factors for patients with chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) combined with sinus tract.Methods:The patients with PJI following hip and knee arthroplasty from July 2014 to January 2020 in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. There were 96 males and 101 females, aged from 26 to 86 years with mean age of 62.02±13.54 years. There were 95 hip PJI patients (48.2%, 95/197), 102 knee PJI patients (51.8%, 102/197), 68 patients (34.5%, 68/197) with sinus tract, 129 patients (65.5%, 129/197) without sinus tract, 162 patients (82.2%, 162/197) with positive culture results and 35 patients (17.8%, 35/197) with negative culture results. The patients were divided into two groups according to the sinus tract formation. The diagnosis of PJI was based on the 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. All of the included patients underwent serological laboratory tests (white blood cell count, neutrophil percentage, lymphocyte percentage, hemoglobin, platelet count, mean platelet volume, urea, creatinine, albumin, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein) and pathogen isolation. The influence of sinus tract on the above test and the effects of complications on sinus tract formation were analyzed. We further investigated the relationship between sinus tract formation and the features of pathogen. In addition, the risk factors for sinus tract formation were analyzed.Results:The mean values of all serological tests were without statistical difference between the groups with and without sinus tract ( P>0.05). The presence of complications had no effect on the occurrence of sinus tract ( P>0.05). The incidence of sinus tract with highly virulent pathogen infection group (52.1%, 25/48) was significantly higher than that in low virulence pathogen group (27.5%, 19/69), in culture negative patients (40.0%, 14/35) and in other cases (22.2%, 10/45; χ 2=11.519, P=0.009). There was no statistical difference between groups based on the Gram staining, antibiotic resistance and polymicrobial infection. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed positive associations of extra joint infections ( OR=4.426, 95% CI: 1.095, 17.884) and high virulent pathogen infections ( OR=2.633, 95% CI: 1.171, 5.918) and negative association of age ≥70 ( OR=0.436, 95% CI: 0.205, 0.927) with the risk of sinus tract formation. Conclusion:The presence of sinus tract has no effect on the routine serum tests in patients with chronic PJI. There is only virulence factor which might affect sinus tract formation. For patients with the extra joint infections and high virulence pathogen infections, the formation of sinus tract should be vigilant during treatment.

Objective:To investigate the clinical evaluation effects of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk assessment scale on preoperative and surgical risk of liver transplantation during the COVID-19 outbreak.Methods:The retrospective and descriptive study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 6 liver transplant recipients who were admitted to Southern Theater Command General Hospital of PLA between January 20 and March 27, 2020 were collected. There were 5 males and 1 female, aged from 42.0 to 62.0 years, with a median age of 53.0 years. There were 6 donors including 5 males and 1 female, aged from 24.0 to 60.0 years, with a median age of 41.5 years. All the donor livers were obtained through the China Organ Transplant Response System. Liver transplantation was performed in the fixed negative pressure operating room, and secondary protective measures were adopted for low-risk donors. Classic orthotopic liver transplantation or Piggyback liver transplantation was performed according to the specific situations of the recipients. Medical staffs in the ward were exposed to the secondary protective measures, and the three-grade protective measures were adopted for medical staffs when the liver transplant recipients had fever or suspected infection. Observation indicators: (1) risk assessment of COVID-19 on liver transplant recipients; (2) risk assessment of COVID-19 on medical staffs of liver transplantation; (3) treatment situations of liver transplant recipients; (4) postoperative situations of liver transplant recipients; (5) follow-up of liver transplant recipients; (6) infection of medical staffs of liver transplantation. Follow-up was performed using outpatient examination or telephone interview to detect whether liver transplant recipients had suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection up to March 2020. Medical staffs who were involved in organ acquisition, transplantation surgery and ward management were followed up to detect whether they had suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection within 14 days. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range). Count data were expressed as absolute numbers. Results:(1) Risk assessment of COVID-19 on liver transplant recipients: all the 6 recipients and their related families were confirmed no contact with suspected COVID-19 patients or travel history in the epidemic area within 14 days. Of the 6 recipients, 1 was diagnosed with fever with body temperature of 38.1 ℃ and was tested negative for chest computer tomography (CT) examination and nucleic acid test for COVID-19; 1 was diagnosed with fever and hypoxemia with body temperature of 38.5 ℃ and was tested negative for nucleic acid test for COVID-19, and the results of chest CT examination showed large amount of pleural effusion in both lungs without invasive pneumonia; other 4 recipients had no clinical symptoms of COVID-19 with negative results of chest CT examination and nucleic acid test for COVID-19. Five of the 6 recipients had no history of contact with COVID-19 patients and 1 recipient had treatment history at hospital of risk level 1. The preoperative risk level of COVID-19 was low in all the 6 liver transplant recipients. (2) Risk assessment of COVID-19 on medical staffs of liver transplantation: of the 6 recipients, 5 had the waiting hospital of risk level 0 and 1 had the waiting hospital of risk level 1. Six recipients had the transplant hospital of risk level 0. (3) Treatment situations of liver transplant recipients: of the 6 recipients, 2 underwent classic orthotopic liver transplantation and 4 underwent piggyback liver transplantation. The cold ischemia time of liver, time of anhepatic phase, volume of intraoperative blood loss, operation time, treatment time at intensive care unit of the 6 recipients were (5.9±2.4)hours, (49±14)minutes, 1 500 mL(range, 800-1 800 mL), (8.9±2.1)hours, 2 days(range, 1-4 days), respectively. Of the 6 recipients, 2 required adjustment of the immunosuppression program, and 4 did not change the immunosuppression program. (4) Postoperative situations of liver transplant recipients: of the 6 recipients, 5 had no postoperative serious infection and 1 had postoperative serious infection. The 5 recipients without postoperative serious infection had the range of the highest temperature as 37.8-38.5 ℃, and returned to normal temperature within postoperative 3 days. All of the 5 recipients who had no postoperative serious infection received chest CT examination with no obvious manifestation of viral pneumonia and were tested negative for nucleic acid test for COVID-19 at 1 week postoperatively, and then were discharged from hospital. One recipient who had postoperative serious infection had gastrointestinal fistula and repeated fever at postoperative 7 days with the highest temperature as 39.2 ℃. This recipient had body temperature returned to normal and good function of the graft after treatment in the isolation ward with active drainage, and was transferred back to local hospital for further rehabilitation treatment. The duration of hospital stay of the 6 recipients were 30 days(range, 15-74 days). (5) Follow-up of liver transplant recipients: all the 6 recipients were followed up for 31.5 days(range, 12.0-64.0 days) with the normal body temperature, and they had negative results of viral pneumonia for chest CT examination and nucleic acid test for COVID-19. (6) Infection of medical staffs of liver transplantation: surgeons, nurses, anesthetists, medical staffs at ICU and medical staffs at liver transplantation center who participated in liver transplantation had good health within postoperative 14 days, without suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection.Conclusions:The COVID-19 risk assessment scale has good safety for liver transplant recipients during the COVID-19 outbreak. It is suggested that organ transplantation can be carried out in low-risk recipients and cautiously carried out in recipients of uncertain risk, but organ transplantation should not be carried out in high-risk recipients.

Animals ; Brain ; physiology ; Consciousness ; physiology ; Humans ; Mice ; Neurotransmitter Agents ; physiology ; Optics and Photonics ; Synaptic Transmission ; physiology