Control of excessive neural circuit excitability and prevention of epileptic seizures by endocannabinoid signaling

Progress in research on endocannabinoid signaling has greatly advanced our understanding of how it controls neural circuit excitability in health and disease. In general, endocannabinoid signaling at excitatory synapses suppresses seizures by inhibiting glutamate release. In contrast, endocannabinoid signaling promotes seizures by inhibiting GABA release at inhibitory synapses. The physiological distribution of endocannabinoid signaling molecules becomes disrupted with the development of epileptic focus in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy and in animal models of experimentally induced epilepsy. Augmentation of endocannabinoid signaling can promote the development of epileptic focus at initial stages. However, at later stages, increased endocannabinoid signaling delays it and suppresses spontaneous seizures. Thus, the regulation of endocannabinoid signaling at specific synapses that cause hyperexcitability during particular stages of disease development may be effective for treating epilepsy and epileptogenesis.     

The material theory of induction and the epistemology of thought experiments

John D. Norton is responsible for a number of influential views in contemporary philosophy of science. This paper will discuss two of them. The material theory of induction claims that inductive arguments are ultimately justified by their material features, not their formal features. Thus, while a deductive argument can be valid irrespective of the content of the propositions that make up the argument, an inductive argument about, say, apples, will be justified (or not) depending on facts about apples. The argument view of thought experiments claims that thought experiments are arguments, and that they function epistemically however arguments do. These two views have generated a great deal of discussion, although there hasn't been much written about their combination. I argue that despite some interesting harmonies, there is a serious tension between them. I consider several options for easing this tension, before suggesting a set of changes to the argument view that I take to be consistent with Norton's fundamental philosophical commitments, and which retain what seems intuitively correct about the argument view. These changes require that we move away from a unitary epistemology of thought experiments and towards a more pluralist position.     

Melatonin transport into mitochondria

Melatonin is a well-known, nighttime-produced indole found in bacteria, eukaryotic unicellulars, animals or vascular plants. In vertebrates, melatonin is the major product of the pineal gland, which accounts for its increase in serum during the dark phase, but it is also produced by many other organs and cell types. Such a wide distribution is consistent with its multiple and well-described functions which include from the circadian regulation and adaptation to seasonal variations to immunomodulatory and oncostatic actions in different types of tumors. The discovery of its antioxidant properties in the early 1990s opened a new field of potential protective functions in multiple tissues. A special mention should be made regarding the nervous system, where the indole is considered a major neuroprotector. Furthermore, mitochondria appear as one of the most important targets for the indole’s protective actions. Melatonin’s mechanisms of action vary from the direct molecular interaction with free radicals (free radical scavenger) to the binding to membrane (MLT1A and MLT1B) or nuclear receptors (RZR/RORα). Receptor binding has been associated with some, but not all of the indole functions reported to date. Recently, two new mechanisms of cellular uptake involving the facilitative glucose transporters GLUT/SLC2A and the proton-driven oligopeptide transporter PEPT1/2 have been reported. Here we discuss the potential importance that these newly discovered transport systems could have in determining the actions of melatonin, particularly in the mitochondria. We also argue the relative importance of passive diffusion vs active transport in different parts of the cell.     

ATP-induced Ca<Superscript>2+</Superscript>-signalling mechanisms in the regulation of mesenchymal stem cell migration

The ability of cells to migrate to the destined tissues or lesions is crucial for physiological processes from tissue morphogenesis, homeostasis and immune responses, and also for stem cell-based regenerative medicines. Cytosolic Ca²⁺ is a primary second messenger in the control and regulation of a wide range of cell functions including cell migration. Extracellular ATP, together with the cognate receptors on the cell surface, ligand-gated ion channel P2X receptors and a subset of G-protein-coupled P2Y receptors, represents common autocrine and/or paracrine Ca²⁺ signalling mechanisms. The P2X receptor ion channels mediate extracellular Ca²⁺ influx, whereas stimulation of the P2Y receptors triggers intracellular Ca²⁺ release from the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), and activation of both type of receptors thus can elevate the cytosolic Ca²⁺ concentration ([Ca²⁺]_c), albeit with different kinetics and capacity. Reduction in the ER Ca²⁺ level following the P2Y receptor activation can further induce store-operated Ca²⁺ entry as a distinct Ca²⁺ influx pathway that contributes in ATP-induced increase in the [Ca²⁺]_c. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are a group of multipotent stem cells that grow from adult tissues and hold promising applications in tissue engineering and cell-based therapies treating a great and diverse number of diseases. There is increasing evidence to show constitutive or evoked ATP release from stem cells themselves or mature cells in the close vicinity. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms for ATP release and clearance, the receptors and ion channels participating in ATP-induced Ca²⁺ signalling and the roles of such signalling mechanisms in mediating ATP-induced regulation of MSC migration.     

Developing anti-neoplastic biotherapeutics against eIF4F

Biotherapeutics have revolutionized modern medicine by providing medicines that would not have been possible with small molecules. With respect to cancer therapies, this represents the current sector of the pharmaceutical industry having the largest therapeutic impact, as exemplified by the development of recombinant antibodies and cell-based therapies. In cancer, one of the most common regulatory alterations is the perturbation of translational control. Among these, changes in eukaryotic initiation factor 4F (eIF4F) are associated with tumor initiation, progression, and drug resistance in a number of settings. This, coupled with the fact that systemic suppression of eIF4F appears well tolerated, indicates that therapeutic agents targeting eIF4F hold much therapeutic potential. Here, we discuss opportunities offered by biologicals for this purpose.     

Selective susceptibility to nanosecond pulsed electric field (nsPEF) across different human cell types

Tumor ablation by nanosecond pulsed electric fields (nsPEF) is an emerging therapeutic modality. We compared nsPEF cytotoxicity for human cell lines of cancerous (IMR-32, Hep G2, HT-1080, and HPAF-II) and non-cancerous origin (BJ and MRC-5) under strictly controlled and identical conditions. Adherent cells were uniformly treated by 300-ns PEF (0–2000 pulses, 1.8 kV/cm, 50 Hz) on indium tin oxide-covered glass coverslips, using the same media and serum. Cell survival plotted against the number of pulses displayed three distinct regions (initial resistivity, logarithmic survival decline, and residual resistivity) for all tested cell types, but with differences in LD₅₀ spanning as much as nearly 80-fold. The non-cancerous cells were less sensitive than IMR-32 neuroblastoma cells but more vulnerable than the other cancers tested. The cytotoxic efficiency showed no apparent correlation with cell or nuclear size, cell morphology, metabolism level, or the extent of membrane disruption by nsPEF. Increasing pulse duration to 9 µs (0.75 kV/cm, 5 Hz) produced a different selectivity pattern, suggesting that manipulation of PEF parameters can, at least for certain cancers, overcome their resistance to nsPEF ablation. Identifying mechanisms and cell markers of differential nsPEF susceptibility will critically contribute to the proper choice and outcome of nsPEF ablation therapies.