The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2024
Multiplexed immunohistochemical evaluation of small bowel inflammatory and epithelial parameters in environmental enteric dysfunction.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
VanBuskirk Kelley, Mweetwa Monica, Kolterman Tad, Raghavan Shyam, Ahmed Tahmeed, Ali S Asad, Nahar Begum Sm Khodeza, Besa Ellen, Denno Donna M, Jamil Zehra, Kelly Paul, Mahfuz Mustafa, Moore Sean R, Mouksassi Samer, Petri William A, Tarr Phillip I, Sullivan Peter B, Moskaluk Christopher A, EEDBI Consortium
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Environmental enteric dysfunction (EED) is characterized by reduced absorptive capacity and barrier function of the small intestine, leading to poor ponderal and linear childhood growth.
OBJECTIVES: To further define gene expression patterns that are associated with EED to uncover new pathophysiology of this disorder.
METHODS: Duodenal biopsies from cohorts of children with EED from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Zambia were analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) to interrogate gene products that distinguished differentiation and various biochemical pathways in immune and epithelial cells, some identified by prior bulk RNA sequence analyses. Immunohistochemical staining was digitally quantified from scanned images and compared to cohorts of North American children with celiac disease (gluten-sensitive enteropathy) or with no known enteric disease and no pathologic abnormality (NPA) detected in their clinical biopsies.
RESULTS: After multivariable statistical analysis, we identified statistically significant (P < 0.05, 2-tailed t-test) elevated signals representing cluster of differentiation 45 (80%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 24%, 127%), lipocalin 2 (659%; 95% CI: 198%, 1838%), and regenerating family 1 beta (221%; 95% CI: 47%, 600%) and lower signals corresponding to granzyme B (-74%; 95% CI: -82%, -62%), and sucrase isomaltase (-58%; 95% CI: -75%, -29%) in EED biopsies compared with NPA biopsies. Computerized algorithms also detected statistically significant elevation in intraepithelial lymphocytes (49%; 95% CI: 9%, 105%) and proliferation of leukocytes (267%; 95% CI: 92%, 601%) in EED biopsies compared with NPA biopsies.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results support a model of chronic epithelial stress that decreases epithelial differentiation and absorptive function. The close association of several IHC parameters with manual histologic scoring suggests that automated digital quantification of IHC panels complements traditional histomorphologic assessment in EED.
OBJECTIVES: To further define gene expression patterns that are associated with EED to uncover new pathophysiology of this disorder.
METHODS: Duodenal biopsies from cohorts of children with EED from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Zambia were analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) to interrogate gene products that distinguished differentiation and various biochemical pathways in immune and epithelial cells, some identified by prior bulk RNA sequence analyses. Immunohistochemical staining was digitally quantified from scanned images and compared to cohorts of North American children with celiac disease (gluten-sensitive enteropathy) or with no known enteric disease and no pathologic abnormality (NPA) detected in their clinical biopsies.
RESULTS: After multivariable statistical analysis, we identified statistically significant (P < 0.05, 2-tailed t-test) elevated signals representing cluster of differentiation 45 (80%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 24%, 127%), lipocalin 2 (659%; 95% CI: 198%, 1838%), and regenerating family 1 beta (221%; 95% CI: 47%, 600%) and lower signals corresponding to granzyme B (-74%; 95% CI: -82%, -62%), and sucrase isomaltase (-58%; 95% CI: -75%, -29%) in EED biopsies compared with NPA biopsies. Computerized algorithms also detected statistically significant elevation in intraepithelial lymphocytes (49%; 95% CI: 9%, 105%) and proliferation of leukocytes (267%; 95% CI: 92%, 601%) in EED biopsies compared with NPA biopsies.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results support a model of chronic epithelial stress that decreases epithelial differentiation and absorptive function. The close association of several IHC parameters with manual histologic scoring suggests that automated digital quantification of IHC panels complements traditional histomorphologic assessment in EED.