Brain tumours are a serious concern among both physicians and patients. The most feared brain tumour is glioblastoma (GBM) due to its heterogeneous histology, substantial invasive capacity, and rapid postsurgical recurrence. Even in cases of early management consisting of surgery, chemo-, and radiotherapy, the prognosis is still poor, with an extremely short survival period. Consequently, researchers are trying to better understand the underlying pathways involved in GBM development in order to establish a more personalised approach. The latest focus is on molecular characterisation of the tumour, including analysis of extracellular vesicles (EVs), nanostructures derived from both normal and pathological cells that have an important role in intercellular communication due to the various molecules they carry. There are two types of EV based on their biogenesis, but exosomes are of particular interest in GBM. Recent studies have demonstrated that GBM cells release numerous exosomes whose cargo provides them the capacity to facilitate tumour cell invasion and migration, to stimulate malignant transformation of previously normal cells, to increase immune tolerance towards the tumour, to induce resistance to chemotherapy, and to enhance the GBM vascular supply. As exosomes are specific to their parental cells, their isolation would allow a deeper perspective on GBM pathogenesis. A new era of molecular manipulation has emerged, and exosomes are rapidly proving their value not only as diagnostic and prognostic markers, but also as tools in therapies specifically targeting GBM cells. Nonetheless, further research will be required before exosomes could be used in clinical practice. This review aims to describe the structural and functional characteristics of exosomes and their involvement in GBM development, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment.

No abstract

The disruption of blood–brain barrier (BBB) for multiple sclerosis (MS) pathogenesis has a double effect: early on during the onset of the immune attack and later for the CNS self-sustained ‘inside-out’ demyelination and neurodegeneration processes. This review presents the characteristics of BBB malfunction in MS but mostly highlights current developments regarding the impairment of the neurovascular unit (NVU) and the metabolic and mitochondrial dysfunctions of the BBB’s endothelial cells. The hypoxic hypothesis is largely studied and agreed upon recently in the pathologic processes in MS. Hypoxia in MS might be produced per se by the NVU malfunction or secondary to mitochondria dysfunction. We present three different but related terms that denominate the ongoing neurodegenerative process in progressive forms of MS that are indirectly related to BBB disruption: progression independent of relapses, no evidence of disease activity and smoldering demyelination or silent progression. Dimethyl fumarate (DMF), modulators of S1P receptor, cladribine and laquinimode are DMTs that are able to cross the BBB and exhibit beneficial direct effects in the CNS with very different mechanisms of action, providing hope that a combined therapy might be effective in treating MS. Detailed mechanisms of action of these DMTs are described and also illustrated in dedicated images. With increasing knowledge about the involvement of BBB in MS pathology, BBB might become a therapeutic target in MS not only to make it impenetrable against activated immune cells but also to allow molecules that have a neuroprotective effect in reaching the cell target inside the CNS.

No abstract

Objective: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) are extremely important in the body's immune response. Their isolation represents a major step in many immunological experiments. In this two phase study, we aimed to establish an optimum protocol for PBMC isolation by density-gradient centrifugation. Methods: During Phase-1, we compared two commercially available PBMC isolation protocols, Stemcell Technologies (ST) and Miltenyi Biotec (MB), in terms of PBMC recovery and purity. Twelve blood samples were assigned to each protocol. Each sample was divided in three subsamples of 1ml, 2ml and 3ml in order to assess the influence of blood sample volume on isolation performance. During Phase-2, a hybrid protocol was similarly tested, processing six blood samples. Additionally, we performed a flow cytometric analysis using an Annexin-V/Propidium-Iodide viability staining protocol. Results: Phase-1 results showed that, for all subsample volumes, ST had superior PBMC recovery (mean values: 56%, 80% and 87%, respectively) compared to MB (mean values: 39%, 54% and 43%, respectively). However, platelet removal was significantly higher for MB (mean value of 96.8%) than for ST (mean value of 75.2%). Regarding granulocyte/erythrocyte contamination, both protocols performed similarly, yielding high purity PBMC (mean values: 97.3% for ST and 95.8% for MB). During Phase-2, our hybrid protocol yielded comparable results to MB, with an average viability of 89.4% for lymphocytes and 16.9% for monocytes. Conclusions: ST yields higher cell recovery rates and MB excels at platelet removal, while the hybrid protocol is highly similar to MB. Both cell recovery and viability increase with blood sample volume.