No abstract

Chlorogenic acid (CA) has been discovered to regulate macrophage polarization in pneumonia. This study aims to analyze the functional mechanism of CA in alveolar macrophage (AM) polarization and provide a theoretical basis for treatment of Klebsiella pneumoniae (Kp)-induced pneumonia. Mice were infected with Kp, and treated with CA and silent information regulator 1 (SIRT1) inhibitor (Selisistat). Mouse survival rate was recorded and bacterial burden was detected. AM polarization and pathologic change of lung tissues were evaluated. Expressions of SIRT1 and HMGB1 and cytokine levels were detected. MH-S cells were infected with Kp to establish the pneumonia cell model, followed by transfection of si-SIRT1 and HMGB1 overexpression vector. The HMGB1 expression in the nucleus and cytoplasm was detected. HMGB1 subcellular localization and HMGB1 acetylation level were detected. Kp led to high death rates, SIRT down-regulation and increases in inflammatory factor level and bacterial burden, and promoted M1 polarization. CA treatment improved mouse survival rate and promoted M2 polarization and SIRT1 expression. SIRT1 decreased HMGB1 acetylation level to inhibit nuclear to the cytoplasm translocation. Silencing SIRT1 or HMGB1 overexpression reversed the effect of CA on Kp-induced pneumonia. Overall, CA activated SIRT1 to inhibit HMGB1 acetylation level and nuclear translocation, thereby promoting M2 polarization in AMs and alleviating Kp-induced pneumonia.

No abstract

Aim: To determine the percentage of published reports that used one of the three standard definitions of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Methods: 100 original research articles or reviews listed under 'sudden infant death syndrome' on PubMed were allocated into two groups: (a) those where a standard definition had not been cited, including those without definitions, with idiosyncratic or incorrect definitions, or with incorrect referencing, and (b) those where one of the standard definitions was either correctly cited in the text and/or was correctly referenced. Results: 89% did not use any, or quoted/cited/referenced a nonstandard, definition. Of the remaining 11, 9 both quoted a standard definition in the text and correctly referenced it. The remainder either quoted a standard reference in the text or correctly referenced it. Conclusion: On preliminary analysis of an initial 100 papers, only 9% of papers on SIDS in the contemporary literature both correctly quoted and referenced one of the three standard internationally-accepted definitions. A full 89% had used either no or an idiosyncratic definition with incorrect references. Clearly, the lack of adherence to standard definitions makes interpretation and comparison of studies difficult. The subsequent citation of such papers only further compounds the confusion.