Trends in using mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) in treating corneal diseases

Since their inception in the 1960s–70s, mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) have gained interest because of their differentiation potential, anti-inflammatory effects, and immune-modulating properties. Both cell-based and cell-free MSC treatments show healing capacity in injured tissues. Cell-based treatment comprises MSCs and all secreted products, whereas cell-free treatments include only the secreted products. MSCs are therapeutically administered to many damaged organs owing to their efficacy. Specifically, the eye is a unique organ system to study the effects of MSCs, as treatment is easily applied and measured owing to its external location. The eye holds an immune-privileged status, wherein inflammation and immune responses are innately down-regulated. As excessive inflammation in the cornea often leads to fibrosis and irreversible corneal hazing, many studies have investigated the anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating capacities of MSCs. Decades of research suggest that MSCs modulate the immune response by secreting cytokines, growth factors, and extracellular matrix proteins that inhibit the infiltration of inflammatory cells following injury and promote a healing phenotype via M2 macrophage polarization. MSCs have also shown trans-differentiation potential into cornea-specific cell types during the wound healing process, such as corneal epithelial, stromal, or endothelial cells. This review discusses recent investigations of MSC treatment in the cornea, focusing on therapeutic efficacy, mechanisms, and future directions.     

Multiomic analysis reveals conservation of cancer-associated fibroblast phenotypes across species and tissue of origin

1. Download : Download high-res image (241KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of resectable acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas-propensity score matching analysis with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BackgroundSurgical resection is recommended for patients with resectable acinar cell carcinoma (ACC). The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of resectable ACC in comparison to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).MethodA retrospective analysis was performed on all patients who consecutively underwent radical resection with pathologically confirmed ACC and PDAC from December 2011 to December 2018. Clinicopathologic characteristics and follow-up information were analyzed. A 1:3 propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to minimize the bias between ACC and PDAC.ResultsA total of 26 patients with ACC and 1351 with PDAC were included. Compared to PDAC, ACC tended to be larger (4.5 vs. 3.0 cm; p < 0.001) and more frequently located in the pancreatic body/tail (61.5% vs. 36.6%, p = 0.009), with lower total bilirubin levels, lower neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels and lower carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) levels and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. There was no difference in postoperative morbidities in patients with ACC and PDAC. The median OS and RFS were longer in ACC when compared to PDAC (OS: 43.5 mo vs. 19.0 mo, p = 0.004; RFS: 24.5 mo vs. 11.6 mo, p = 0.023). After the 1:3 PSM, ACC remained to be a better histological type for OS (p = 0.024), but had comparable RFS with PDAC (p = 0.164).ConclusionPatients with ACC after radical resection had better OS than that with PDAC. However, ACC is also an aggressive tumor with a similar trend of RFS with PDAC after the matching, necessitating the multidisciplinary treatment for resectable ACC disease.     

How does transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease compare to hematopoietic cell transplantation-associated graft-versus-host disease?

Transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease (TA-GVHD) is a rare life-threatening complication of blood transfusion caused by donor T cells that escape rejection by the recipient immune system. These donor T cells drive recipient tissue damage in response to host antigens. On the other hand, GVHD occurring after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT-GVHD) is also caused by donor T cells, but its pathophysiology is more complex and differs due to the effects of tissue damage caused by pre?HCT conditioning and profound immunosuppression. Both TA-GVHD and HCT-GVHD can be fatal; however, mortality is higher with TA-GVHD due to the paucity of treatment options. Here, we compare and summarize the presentation, diagnosis, pathophysiology, prevention, and treatment of TA-GVHD and HCT-GVHD.