Search

Background: Electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve (VN) is a therapy for epilepsy, obesity, depression, and heart diseases. However, whole nerve stimulation leads to side effects. We examined the neuroanatomy of the mid-cervical segment of the human VN and its superior cardiac branch to gain insight into the side effects of VN stimulation and aid in developing targeted stimulation strategies., Methods: Nerve specimens were harvested from eight human body donors, then subjected to immunofluorescence and semiautomated quantification to determine the signature, quantity, and spatial distribution of different axonal categories., Results: The right and left cervical VN (cVN) contained a total of 25,489 ± 2781 and 23,286 ± 3164 fibers, respectively. Two-thirds of the fibers were unmyelinated and one-third were myelinated. About three-quarters of the fibers in the right and left cVN were sensory (73.9 ± 7.5 % versus 72.4 ± 5.6 %), while 13.2 ± 1.8 % versus 13.3 ± 3.0 % were special visceromotor and parasympathetic, and 13 ± 5.9 % versus 14.3 ± 4.0 % were sympathetic. Special visceromotor and parasympathetic fibers formed clusters. The superior cardiac branches comprised parasympathetic, vagal sensory, and sympathetic fibers with the left cardiac branch containing more sympathetic fibers than the right (62.7 ± 5.4 % versus 19.8 ± 13.3 %), and 50 % of the left branch contained sensory and sympathetic fibers only., Conclusion: The study indicates that selective stimulation of vagal sensory and motor fibers is possible. However, it also highlights the potential risk of activating sympathetic fibers in the superior cardiac branch, especially on the left side., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that there is no financial or personal relationship with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence their work., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Comparative assessments of immunogenicity following different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with distinct liver diseases are lacking. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell and antibody responses were evaluated longitudinally after one to three vaccine doses, with long-term follow-up for COVID-19-related clinical outcomes., Methods: A total of 849 participants (355 with cirrhosis, 74 with autoimmune hepatitis [AIH], 36 with vascular liver disease [VLD], 257 liver transplant recipients [LTRs] and 127 healthy controls [HCs]) were recruited from four countries. Standardised immune assays were performed pre and post three vaccine doses (V1-3)., Results: In the total cohort, there were incremental increases in antibody titres after each vaccine dose (p <0.0001). Factors associated with reduced antibody responses were age and LT, whereas heterologous vaccination, prior COVID-19 and mRNA platforms were associated with greater responses. Although antibody titres decreased between post-V2 and pre-V3 (p = 0.012), patients with AIH, VLD, and cirrhosis had equivalent antibody responses to HCs post-V3. LTRs had lower and more heterogenous antibody titres than other groups, including post-V3 where 9% had no detectable antibodies; this was heavily influenced by intensity of immunosuppression. Vaccination increased T-cell IFNγ responses in all groups except LTRs. Patients with liver disease had lower functional antibody responses against nine Omicron subvariants and reduced T-cell responses to Omicron BA.1-specific peptides compared to wild-type. 122 cases of breakthrough COVID-19 were reported of which 5/122 (4%) were severe. Of the severe cases, 4/5 (80%) occurred in LTRs and 2/5 (40%) had no serological response post-V2., Conclusion: After three COVID-19 vaccines, patients with liver disease generally develop robust antibody and T-cell responses to vaccination and have mild COVID-19. However, LTRs have sustained no/low antibody titres and appear most vulnerable to severe disease., Impact and Implications: Standardised assessments of the immune response to different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with liver disease are lacking. We performed antibody and T-cell assays at multiple timepoints following up to three vaccine doses in a large cohort of patients with a range of liver conditions. Overall, the three most widely available vaccine platforms were immunogenic and appeared to protect against severe breakthrough COVID-19. This will provide reassurance to patients with chronic liver disease who were deemed at high risk of severe COVID-19 during the pre-vaccination era, however, liver transplant recipients had the lowest antibody titres and remained vulnerable to severe breakthrough infection. We also characterise the immune response to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants and describe the interaction between disease type, severity, and vaccine platform. These insights may prove useful in the event of future viral infections which also require rapid vaccine development and delivery to patients with liver disease., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) possess immunosuppressive properties. But also fully differentiated human renal tubular epithelial cells (RTECs) are able to modulate T-cell proliferation in vitro. In this study we compared two MSC populations, human adipose derived stem cells (ASCs) and human amniotic mesenchymal stromal cells (hAMSCs), and RTECs regarding their potential to inhibit monocyte-derived dendritic cell (DC) differentiation and maturation in indirect co-culture. In the presence of hAMSCs and RTECs, monocytes stimulated to undergo DC differentiation were inhibited to acquire surface phenotype of immature and mature DCs. In contrast, ASCs showed only limited suppressive capacity. Secretion of IL-12p70 was suppressed in hAMSC co-cultures and high IL-10 levels were detected in all co-cultures. Prostaglandin E(2) was found in ASC and hAMSC co-cultures, whereas soluble human leukocyte antigen-G was highly elevated only in RTEC co-cultures. Thus, inhibition of DC generation by MSCs and RTECs might be mediated by different soluble factors., (2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)