5.Dimethyl fumarate modulates M1/M2 macrophage polarization to ameliorate periodontal destruction by increasing TUFM-mediated mitophagy.
Liang CHEN ; Pengxiao HU ; Xinhua HONG ; Bin LI ; Yifan PING ; ShuoMin CHEN ; Tianle JIANG ; Haofu JIANG ; Yixin MAO ; Yang CHEN ; Zhongchen SONG ; Zhou YE ; Xiaoyu SUN ; Shufan ZHAO ; Shengbin HUANG
International Journal of Oral Science 2025;17(1):32-32
Periodontitis is a common oral disease characterized by progressive alveolar bone resorption and inflammation of the periodontal tissues. Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) has been used in the treatment of various immune-inflammatory diseases due to its excellent anti-inflammatory and antioxidant functions. Here, we investigated for the first time the therapeutic effect of DMF on periodontitis. In vivo studies showed that DMF significantly inhibited periodontal destruction, enhanced mitophagy, and decreased the M1/M2 macrophage ratio. In vitro studies showed that DMF inhibited macrophage polarization toward M1 macrophages and promoted polarization toward M2 macrophages, with improved mitochondrial function, inhibited oxidative stress, and increased mitophagy in RAW 264.7 cells. Furthermore, DMF increased intracellular mitochondrial Tu translation elongation factor (TUFM) levels to maintain mitochondrial homeostasis, promoted mitophagy, and modulated macrophage polarization, whereas TUFM knockdown decreased the protective effect of DMF. Finally, mechanistic studies showed that DMF increased intracellular TUFM levels by protecting TUFM from degradation via the ubiquitin-proteasomal degradation pathway. Our results demonstrate for the first time that DMF protects mitochondrial function and inhibits oxidative stress through TUFM-mediated mitophagy in macrophages, resulting in a shift in the balance of macrophage polarization, thereby attenuating periodontitis. Importantly, this study provides new insights into the prevention of periodontitis.
Dimethyl Fumarate/pharmacology*
;
Mitophagy/drug effects*
;
Animals
;
Mice
;
Macrophages/metabolism*
;
Periodontitis/prevention & control*
;
RAW 264.7 Cells
;
Oxidative Stress/drug effects*
;
Peptide Elongation Factor Tu/metabolism*
;
Mice, Inbred C57BL
;
Male
;
Mitochondria/drug effects*
6.Expert consensus on the prevention and treatment of radiochemotherapy-induced oral mucositis.
Juan XIA ; Xiaoan TAO ; Qinchao HU ; Wei LUO ; Xiuzhen TONG ; Gang ZHOU ; Hongmei ZHOU ; Hong HUA ; Guoyao TANG ; Tong WU ; Qianming CHEN ; Yuan FAN ; Xiaobing GUAN ; Hongwei LIU ; Chaosu HU ; Yongmei ZHOU ; Xuemin SHEN ; Lan WU ; Xin ZENG ; Qing LIU ; Renchuan TAO ; Yuan HE ; Yang CAI ; Wenmei WANG ; Ying ZHANG ; Yingfang WU ; Minhai NIE ; Xin JIN ; Xiufeng WEI ; Yongzhan NIE ; Changqing YUAN ; Bin CHENG
International Journal of Oral Science 2025;17(1):54-54
Radiochemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (OM) is a common oral complication in patients with tumors following head and neck radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Erosion and ulcers are the main features of OM that seriously affect the quality of life of patients and even the progress of tumor treatment. To date, differences in clinical prevention and treatment plans for OM have been noted among doctors of various specialties, which has increased the uncertainty of treatment effects. On the basis of current research evidence, this expert consensus outlines risk factors, clinical manifestations, clinical grading, ancillary examinations, diagnostic basis, prevention and treatment strategies and efficacy indicators for OM. In addition to strategies such as basic oral care, anti-inflammatory and analgesic agents, anti-infective agents, pro-healing agents, and photobiotherapy recommended in previous guidelines, we also emphasize the role of traditional Chinese medicine in OM prevention and treatment. This expert consensus aims to provide references and guidance for dental physicians and oncologists in formulating strategies for OM prevention, diagnosis, and treatment, standardizing clinical practice, reducing OM occurrence, promoting healing, and improving the quality of life of patients.
Humans
;
Chemoradiotherapy/adverse effects*
;
Consensus
;
Risk Factors
;
Stomatitis/etiology*
7.Gallstones, cholecystectomy, and cancer risk: an observational and Mendelian randomization study.
Yuanyue ZHU ; Linhui SHEN ; Yanan HUO ; Qin WAN ; Yingfen QIN ; Ruying HU ; Lixin SHI ; Qing SU ; Xuefeng YU ; Li YAN ; Guijun QIN ; Xulei TANG ; Gang CHEN ; Yu XU ; Tiange WANG ; Zhiyun ZHAO ; Zhengnan GAO ; Guixia WANG ; Feixia SHEN ; Xuejiang GU ; Zuojie LUO ; Li CHEN ; Qiang LI ; Zhen YE ; Yinfei ZHANG ; Chao LIU ; Youmin WANG ; Shengli WU ; Tao YANG ; Huacong DENG ; Lulu CHEN ; Tianshu ZENG ; Jiajun ZHAO ; Yiming MU ; Weiqing WANG ; Guang NING ; Jieli LU ; Min XU ; Yufang BI ; Weiguo HU
Frontiers of Medicine 2025;19(1):79-89
This study aimed to comprehensively examine the association of gallstones, cholecystectomy, and cancer risk. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to estimate the observational associations of gallstones and cholecystectomy with cancer risk, using data from a nationwide cohort involving 239 799 participants. General and gender-specific two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was further conducted to assess the causalities of the observed associations. Observationally, a history of gallstones without cholecystectomy was associated with a high risk of stomach cancer (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-4.28), liver and bile duct cancer (aOR=2.46, 95% CI 1.17-5.16), kidney cancer (aOR=2.04, 95% CI 1.05-3.94), and bladder cancer (aOR=2.23, 95% CI 1.01-5.13) in the general population, as well as cervical cancer (aOR=1.69, 95% CI 1.12-2.56) in women. Moreover, cholecystectomy was associated with high odds of stomach cancer (aOR=2.41, 95% CI 1.29-4.49), colorectal cancer (aOR=1.83, 95% CI 1.18-2.85), and cancer of liver and bile duct (aOR=2.58, 95% CI 1.11-6.02). MR analysis only supported the causal effect of gallstones on stomach, liver and bile duct, kidney, and bladder cancer. This study added evidence to the causal effect of gallstones on stomach, liver and bile duct, kidney, and bladder cancer, highlighting the importance of cancer screening in individuals with gallstones.
Humans
;
Mendelian Randomization Analysis
;
Gallstones/complications*
;
Female
;
Male
;
Cholecystectomy/statistics & numerical data*
;
Middle Aged
;
Risk Factors
;
Aged
;
Adult
;
Neoplasms/etiology*
;
Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiology*
8.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report 2023: Gram-positive bacteria
Chaoqun YING ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(2):118-132
Objective:To report the nationwide surveillance results of pathogenic profiles and antimicrobial resistance patterns of Gram-positive bloodstream infections in China in 2023.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-posttive bacteria from blood cultures were collected in member hospitals of National Bloodstream Infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)during January to December 2023. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the dilution method recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). Statistical analyses were conducted using WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software.Results:A total of 4 385 Gram-positive bacterial isolates were obtained from 60 participating center. The top five pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus( n=1 544,35.2%),coagulase-negative Staphylococci( n=1 441,32.9%), Enterococcus faecium( n=574,13.1%), Enterococcus faecalis( n=385,8.8%),and α-hemolytic Streptococci( n=187,4.3%). The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA)and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci(MRCNS)was 26.2%(405/1 544)and 69.8%(1 006/1 441),respectively. Notably,all Staphylococci remained susceptible to glycopeptide or daptomycin. Staphylococcus aureus demonstrated excellent susceptibility(>97.0%)to cephalobiol,rifampicin,trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole,linezolid,minocycline,tigecycline,and eravacycline. No Enterococcus exhibiting resistance to linezolid were detected. Glycopeptide resistance was uncommon but more frequent in Enterococcus faecium(resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin:both 1.7%)compared to Enterococcus faecalis(both 0.3%). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS exhibited significant regional variations across the country( χ2=17.674 and 148.650,respectively,both P<0.001). No vancomycin-resistant Enterococci were detected in central China. Institutional comparison demonstrated higher prevalence of MRSA( χ2=14.111, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.828, P=0.028)in provincial hospitals than that in municipal hospitals. Socioeconomic analysis identified elevated detection rates of both MRSA( χ2=18.986, P<0.001)and MRCNS( χ2=4.477, P=0.034)in less developed regions(per capita GDP
9.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report (2023) : Gram-negative bacteria
Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Chaoqun YING ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Hui DING ; Yanyan LI ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Haifeng MAO ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Lu WANG ; Yongyun LIU ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Donghong HUANG ; Hongyun XU ; Peng ZHANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Hong HE ; Lin ZHENG ; Junmin CAO ; Zhou LIU ; Ying HUANG ; Yan GENG ; Haiquan KANG ; Dan LIU ; Guolin LIAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Yanhong LI ; Baohua ZHANG ; Haixin DONG ; Xiaoyan LI ; Donghua LIU ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Xuefei HU ; Liang GUO ; Sijin MAN ; Dijing SONG ; Rong XU ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Aiyun LI ; Zhuo LI ; Hongxia HU ; Guoping LU ; Jinhua LIANG ; Qiang LIU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Jilu SHEN ; Shuyan HU ; Liang LUAN ; Jian LI ; Ling MENG ; Dengyan QIAO ; Xiusan XIA ; Bo QUAN ; Dahong WANG ; Chunhua HAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Fei LI ; Shifu WANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yunbo CHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2025;18(1):47-62
Objective:To report the results of bacterial resistant investigation collaborative system(BRICS)on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-negative bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2023,and provide reference for clinical tretment of bloodstream infections and prevention and control of bacterial resistance.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of BRICS were collected during January 2023 to December 2023. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were conducted by agar dilution or broth dilution methods recommended by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 were used to analyze the data.Results:During the study period,11 492 strains of Gram-negative bacteria were collected from 60 hospitals,of which 10 098(87.9%)were Enterobacterales and 1 394(12.1%)were non-fermentative bacteria. The top 5 bacterial species were Escherichia coli(50.0%), Klebsiella pneumoniae(26.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa(5.1%), Acinetobacter baumannii complex(5.0%)and Enterobacter cloacae complex(4.1%). The ESBL-producing rates in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirablilis were 46.8%(2 685/5 741),18.3%(549/2 999)and 44.0%(77/175),respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli(CREC)and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae(CRKP)were 1.3%(76/5 741)and 15.0%(450/2 999);32.9%(25/76)and 78.0%(351/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to ceftazidime/avibactam combination,respectively. 94.7%(72/76)and 90.2%(406/450)of CREC and CRKP were sensitive to aztreonam/avibactam combination. Furthermore,57.9%(44/76)and 79.1%(356/450)were sensitive to imipenem/relebactam combination. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii(CRAB)complex was 64.6%(370/573),while more than 80.0% of CRAB complex was sensitive to tigecycline,eravacycline and polymyxin B. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa(CRPA)was 17.0%(99/581). There were differences in the composition ratio of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections and the prevalence of important Gram-negative bacteria resistance among different regions in China,with statistically significant differences in the prevalence of CREC,CRKP,CRPA and CRAB complex( χ2=10.6,28.6,10.8 and 19.3, P<0.05). The prevalence of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli, CREC,CRAB complex and CRKP were higher in provincial hospitals than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=12.5,9.8,12.7 and 57.8,all P<0.01). Conclusions:Gram-negative bacteria are the main pathogens causing bloodstream infections in China,and Escherichia coli is ranked in the top,while the trend of Klebsiella pneumoniae increases continuously with time. CRKP infection shows a slow upward trend,CREC infecton maintains a low prevalence level,and CRAB complex infection continues to exhibit a high prevalence rate. The composition and resistance patterns of pathogens causing bloodstream infections vary to some extent across different regions and levels of hospitals in China.
10.Expert consensus on clinical randomized controlled trial design and evaluation methods for bone grafting or substitute materials in alveolar bone defects.
Xiaoyu LIAO ; Yang XUE ; Xueni ZHENG ; Enbo WANG ; Jian PAN ; Duohong ZOU ; Jihong ZHAO ; Bing HAN ; Changkui LIU ; Hong HUA ; Xinhua LIANG ; Shuhuan SHANG ; Wenmei WANG ; Shuibing LIU ; Hu WANG ; Pei WANG ; Bin FENG ; Jia JU ; Linlin ZHANG ; Kaijin HU
West China Journal of Stomatology 2025;43(5):613-619
Bone grafting is a primary method for treating bone defects. Among various graft materials, xenogeneic bone substitutes are widely used in clinical practice due to their abundant sources, convenient processing and storage, and avoidance of secondary surgeries. With the advancement of domestic production and the limitations of imported products, an increasing number of bone filling or grafting substitute materials isentering clinical trials. Relevant experts have drafted this consensus to enhance the management of medical device clinical trials, protect the rights of participants, and ensure the scientific and effective execution of trials. It summarizes clinical experience in aspects, such as design principles, participant inclusion/exclusion criteria, observation periods, efficacy evaluation metrics, safety assessment indicators, and quality control, to provide guidance for professionals in the field.
Humans
;
Bone Substitutes/therapeutic use*
;
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods*
;
Consensus
;
Bone Transplantation
;
Research Design

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail