Refine Search

New Search

Results: 7

(searched for: 10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104)
Save to Scifeed
Page of 1
Articles per Page
by
Show export options
  Select all
Journal of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Volume 5, pp 163-171; https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.jccm.1001104

Abstract:
With the discovery by Calghatgi (2013) that three common antibiotics (Abs) increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen (ROS) and lipid peroxide (LP) and depleted their natural absorbant glutathione led me to investigate further the potential impacts of these genotoxic substances on carcinogenesis. The range of impacts on mitochondria and cellular DNA varied by antibiotic to those consistent with known prior contributions to carcinogenesis. Specific cancers probably increased by these changes were HCC, RCC (KCC), CRC, cancer of the esophagus. Tumor suppressor gene mutations resulting from LP were noteworthy in this regard and mutations induced in CRC were consistent with those found in carcinogenesis of CRC. In addition depression of short chain fatty acids in microbiomes were found which depress the immune system increasing risk of all cancers. Many cancers were increased according to epidemiological studies linking Abs with elevated odds ratios, with one concern in particular, fatal breast cancer. The impact of loss of functionality of the mitochondria was also linked to depression of the citric acid cycle and therefore ATP which deflected metabolism to glycolysis, the Warburg mechanism also increasing risk of all cancers, favoured by cancer cells. In conclusion, some portion of many cancer types are probably increased in likelihood by number, type and frequency of Abs treatment and chronic residue exposure which varies from individual to individual. This led me to propose a three pronged carcinogenesis mechanism for Abs. 1. Cancer critical mutations 2. Immune depression 3. loss of mitochondrial functionality leading to Warburg effects. Damage to mitochondria were also noted by common pesticides tested in China and cancer associations were also found for many pesticides supporting a similar contributory etiology. Heart health concerns were raised by these findings because of the myriad mitochondria in the heart and because of long term reliability needs. Studies suggesting hearts were affected by Abs and pesticide exposure were presented. Because of their geographical ubiquitousness and the huge range of diseases associated with mitochondrial dysfunction, antibiotics and pesticides and bacteriocidal biocides are of concern for biodiversity and life in general. I propose research steps to evaluate Abs safety and suggest directions for further research and make suggestions on ways to ameliorate Abs toxicity.
, Guofeng Chen,
Published: 3 July 2020
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Octavio Orellana-Serradell, Magda C. Díaz, María Fernanda González, Myriam Gutiérrez, Daniela Herrera, Daniela Jara, Diego Maureira, Jenny L. Ruiz-Fuentes, Sofía Sanhueza,
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, Volume 5; https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.571886

Abstract:
In this article, we aimed to analyze whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated articles were being subjected to the same standards of peer-review as non-COVID-19 articles. In order to do this, we taught eight PhD students manuscript reviewing skills and analyzed eight papers published in valued journals, five of them on COVID-19. Each selected publication was reviewed by at least two graduate students from a Scientific English class and two scientists in charge of the course at the Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile. Several shortcomings were identified in the revised studies, particularly on those related to COVID-19, which led us to conclude that the emergency imposed by the COVID-19 has endangered the quality of the accepted studies. The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly spread throughout the world. This virus is killing many people, and taking a massive physical, as well as mental toll, on the lives of all those that have been infected (Yi et al., 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has severely depressed every country’s economy because governments have been obliged to apply quarantine measures to control the disease. Thus, the impact has not only been on people’s health, but also on their lifestyle and economic situation (Nicola et al., 2020). For these same reasons, many people, including politicians and leaders from different countries, have turned to the scientific community for answers regarding actions that need to be taken to control and treat the disease. Nevertheless, many scientific studies published these days concerning the COVID-19 virus, even those reported by important journals, fall short on experimental evidence to support their conclusions. It is clear that great pressure exists to rapidly know more about this virus and how to stop the pandemic. Notwithstanding, we believe that this is leading editors and reviewers to accept manuscripts that would have never been considered for publication under different circumstances. It is not bad science, it is just not the complete story; the story that the good, high impact journals would normally ask for, when peer reviewing manuscripts for publication. In a Scientific English course for postgraduate students, we taught them how to review a manuscript and gave them several scientific papers on COVID-19 published in prestigious journals. Their task was to elaborate a critique, according to the instructions given by the professors. Additionally, non-COVID-19 articles (but of related subtopics) from similar journals were reviewed by the students as controls. All papers were evaluated by at least two students and reviewed by the two scientists in charge of the course. Considering that: i) journals have received a wealth of manuscripts on COVID-19 and therefore, accelerated the publication reviewing process to allow faster publication, and dissemination of information (pandemic publishing) (Kwon, 2020); ii) the worldwide daily confirmed peak of COVID-19 deaths was at the middle of April 2020 (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-covid-deaths-region), and started rising in December 2019; and iii) data published in a middle-to-high impact journal (IF > 9; 2019) can cause more damage to the public because it is easier to consider the information as reliable and valid (Kwon, 2020), the papers were selected based on the following criteria: i) paper main topic was on COVID-19; ii) publication date was between January–June 2020; iii) articles were mainly brief reports; only one research article was selected; iv) papers were published by journals with an IF > 9.4 (2019). Additionally, as controls, we selected three papers meeting the same criteria, except they did not cover COVID-19. To perform the critique, we used the criteria described under the sub-item “Critique” in Table 1. These criteria included: structure of the paper, data collection, appropriate methods and controls to gather the evidence, analysis and interpretation of evidence lead the reader to similar conclusions than the authors. TABLE 1. Criteria used to evaluate the work performed by the students. Peer reviewing was performed as suggested by published literature (Benos et al., 2003; McPeek et al., 2009; Lippi, 2018). A paper written by Emmie de Wit and colleagues and published by PNAS in February 2020 (de Wit et al., 2020) was reviewed by all students. In this paper, the authors reported that prophylactic treatment with the antiviral drug Remdesivir prevented clinical manifestations in the lungs of Rhesus macaques infected with MERS-CoV, and provided a clear clinical benefit when the drug was administered post infection. They suggest that Remdesivir could be useful in the treatment of other coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19. Although the article is well backed up, there were a number of important concerns. First, the number of animals in each group of the study was very small (six), which led to a considerable variation in the results observed, making the reported therapeutic effect of Remdesivir questionable. In addition, although the authors had two different types of vehicle control groups (three animals/group), the results were treated as if these two groups were the same. Furthermore, the study lacked a control group without viral inoculation. Additionally, only male animals were used, despite the evidence indicating that adverse effects may vary between male and female animals (Klein, 2012). Finally, important clinical details about the macaques, such as their age—which is known to influence MERS-CoV infection outcome (Garbati et al., 2016)—weight, physical activity, presence of chronic diseases, etc., should have been indicated. Yet another limitation of this publication was the absence of toxicity assays. Measurements of renal clearance, liver or renal damage, and determinations of Remdesivir side effects, such as nausea, should have been included. Similar concerns were raised in the rest of the articles analyzed. In another report by Giamarellos-Bourboulis and colleagues published in Cell Host & Microbe in April 2020 (Giamarellos-Bourboulis et al., 2020), the authors describe a unique signature of the immune response, different from that induced by bacterial community-acquired pneumonia sepsis or H1N1 influenza, which precedes severe respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients. The common critique to this study was the lack of healthy controls in some of the experiments, which appeared in only a few of the comparisons performed throughout the article. Healthy controls should have been included in all the analyses, and their clinical data, provided. Additionally, some of the conclusions were drawn using data that appears as non-significant in the corresponding graphs. For example, Figure 2E shows no statistically significant differences between B lymphocyte counts, when comparing immune dysregulated patient samples and intermediate state patients or healthy controls. Therefore, the authors should not have drawn the conclusion of lymphopenia as a characteristic of COVID-19 patients with immune dysregulation. Moreover, many of the figures have high data dispersion, and some of them even show outliers. Statistical outcomes obtained using data sets that include outliers can often be misleading and compromise the generalizability of the research findings (Salgado et al., 2016). Another example is the study by Hoffmann and colleagues published in Molecular Cell in April 2020 (Hoffmann et al., 2020). The authors demonstrate the importance of a multibasic site in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, for proteolytic cleavage. They identify the endo protease Furin as a potential target for therapeutic intervention, since this protease cleaves the S protein, which is a key step for viral entry into lung cells. However, the quantitative densitometric analyses of the immunoblots showing cleavage comparison were not provided, making it hard to extrapolate their conclusions to the actual COVID-19 condition. Furthermore, this study lacked physiologically relevant models, such as a primary lung cell line or an in vivo system, in order to test the different mutations of the multibasic site. The use of a more appropriate model would have permitted a rigorous evaluation of how these mutations affect viral infection. In addition, an in vivo approach would also have been useful to test the effects of the Furin inhibitor, a shortcoming the authors themselves acknowledge in the discussion section, considering that the drug may exert toxic effects. Thus, suggesting Furin as a COVID-19 therapeutic target seemed rather premature. The brief communication published in Nature Medicine in April 2020 by Leung et al. (2020) discusses the efficacy of face masks in preventing transmission of three different viruses, including COVID-19. A major concern here was that the authors did not clearly describe the masks used in the experiments, particularly, in terms of the submicron-sized filter or the mask certification. This information is highly relevant because differences have been reported between different face masks and their ability to filter aerosols (Oberg and Brosseau, 2008). Moreover, differences between aerosols and droplet transmission were not discussed and although the authors concluded that for all studied viruses shedding is higher in nasal swabs than in throat swabs, they did not provide a statistical analysis of these results. Another important problem was the small size of the population analyzed for coronavirus (only 17 patients) and the fact that this sample included patients with chronic medical conditions (five patients) and one smoker. These conditions may cause changes in the respiratory rate and other symptoms that might not be a direct consequence of viral infection but of the underlying condition (Martin et al., 2016; Britto et al., 2017). As an outcome, the number of viral copies in exhaled breath could be altered and might not reflect the real values of most patients. Furthermore, swab samples were taken from all 17 patients; however, in the droplet vs. aerosol experiments, the number of patients was reduced to 10 (without mask) and 9 (with mask), respectively. This limited sample size is insufficient to draw significant conclusions. The last report on COVID-19 reviewed was the one published in Science by Rockx et al. (2020) in April 2020. Here, the authors studied the pathogenesis of infection produced by SARS-CoV-2 and compared it with that of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, using a non-human primate infection model. A common critique here was that the information provided about the studied subjects was incomplete, considering that the main goal of the article was to describe an appropriate animal model for COVID-19 trials. No information concerning the macaques, such as physical status or health condition was provided, although these are parameters that can affect the severity of respiratory diseases. Moreover, the authors did not provide information concerning the exact age of macaques in both MERS and SARS groups, nor did they mention specific details about the inoculation doses used in the experiments. Moreover, the data showed high variability and no statistical analyses were provided. The first article reviewed as a control was published in Cell Host & Microbe by Di Luccia and colleagues, on June 2020 (Di Luccia et al., 2020). The authors studied the effect that undernutrition and microbiota can have on the immune response to oral vaccination in a gnotobiotic mouse model. In this article, we observed that sample collection and clinical data from the donors, the methodology regarding the mouse model, controls and statistics were well detailed. Nevertheless, a common critique found was that the study included only fecal samples from one child donor for each group of study (supplement-responsive and supplement-hyporesponsive). Another article we used as a control was published in PNAS by Wang and colleagues, on June 2020 (Wang et al., 2020). Here, the authors compared the capacity to lower the viral load of wild-type anti–HIV-1 immunoglobulin G1, using an Fc Null variant of the same antibody in both a humanized mouse model and in R. macaques. The article was well written, the methodology was explained with enough detail, and the controls and sample sizes used were appropriate. The only critique made was that the confirmation of the results using different antibodies were performed using distinct virus strains. Our last article reviewed as a control was published in Nature Medicine, in March 2020. Here, Colby and colleagues provide evidence for the safety, immunogenicity, and viral rebound dynamics of a heterologous Ad26, MVA vaccine regimen in antiretroviral therapy-suppressed HIV patients (Colby et al., 2020). The major criticism found here was that the authors did not perform power calculations to obtain an optimal sample size, which they mention was due to the number of available subjects. Furthermore, they used the Wilcoxon test (which compares two related samples) for statistical significance even though their graphs show the comparison of multiple populations. Additionally, they only studied Asian males, which confers, gender and ethnic biases to their results. Therefore, major criticisms that were common to most of the reports on COVID-19 were: i) high variability of the results, or no statistical analysis provided, or results with non-significant differences; ii) lack of appropriate controls; iii) models were not described in detail, incomplete patient information, insufficient information about the experimental design, exact age or lack of information related to doses inoculated, etc.; iv) small sample size; v) no indication of toxicity assays; vi) insufficient evidence provided to claim clinical relevance; vii) a more physiologically relevant model would have been necessary to draw the conclusions. All of the aforementioned elements are crucial requisites that should not be bypassed in the peer reviewing process. Nevertheless, we did notice a greater number of these issues in COVID-19 related papers than in control papers. Additionally, the students also noted that non-COVID-19 articles were more prone to discussing the limitations of the studies and less prone to overselling their results in comparison to COVID-19 related ones. Importantly, a more extended reviewing process was evident for the control articles (>50 days) when compared to the COVID-19 papers (mean = 31 days) (Table 2). TABLE 2. Summary of selected articles, indicating the journal and its impact factor, along with the number of days to final acceptance, and the article type, i.e., short (green) vs. long (orange) articles. Scientific rigor is a must no matter the circumstances. Thus, researchers and scientific journals should not take advantage of the pandemic contingency to publish papers that do not present enough evidence to support the conclusions claimed by the authors. Particularly, in these times when people turn to scientists in search of answers to calm their fears and concerns. The peer review process should assist the scientific community in “assuring the quality of research before it is published and before it can be examined and used by a wider audience” (Cargill and O’Connor, 2013). Therefore, peer reviewing should be carried out thoroughly and meticulously to guarantee that carefully conducted scientific studies are being published in these emergency times. In addition, because the situation is critical and it will inevitably affect the economy worldwide, significant financial cuts are foreseen in every field and discipline, and science is not an exception. However, this is a typical catch-twenty-two situation. Science, research, and experimentation is needed to learn about all these microbes, viruses, and other microorganisms that can cause severe damage to human health, yet funds are being cut in order to provide money for other more immediate needs. What all the relevant players need to learn from this experience, is that science should always be an action rather than a reaction, which is what we are now learning from these articles that have been peer reviewed using less than rigorous criteria. Likewise, while fear of running out of funds and the urgent need for a treatment for this deadly disease may be pressuring from all angles to publish at any cost, ethics and rigor are core scientific values that need to be met to draw meaningful conclusions. Interestingly, when the students were asked to review additional non-COVID-19 articles as controls for this Opinion, they rapidly noticed the apparent differences in the details between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 articles with respect to the methodology used and other significant issues analyzed during this study (see Table 1). Thus, the question as to whether COVID-19 articles, given the current pandemic, are being reviewed with a less critical eye is supported here by the comparison performed with the non-COVID-19 article reviews. Until now, other authors have also remarked on this issue (Bagdasarian et al., 2020; Kwon, 2020). However, it is noteworthy to point out that peer reviewing is a complex task that involves human judgment and interpretation of someone else’s experimental design and findings, and as such, it is not free of error (e.g, see http://retractionwatch.com/). The authors confirm to have contributed to this work and have all approved it for publication. LL was funded by the Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID) grant (FCYT1200836), OO was funded by the Millennium Nucleus of Ion Channel-Associated Diseases (MiNICAD), and the PhD students by ANID fellowships [Beca Doctorado Nacional 21190214 (DJ); 21170292 (MFG); 21201941 (DM); 21191668 (DH); 21190725 (JR); 21191341 (MD), and tuition fee/stipend grant for Doctoral Studies 2020, from the Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile (MG, SS)]. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors would like to thank Andrew Quest for insightful discussions regarding the topic and Ana María Avalos for her editing/proofreading contribution. Bagdasarian, N., Cross, G. B., and Fisher, D. (2020). Rapid publications risk the integrity of science in the era of COVID-19. BMC Med. 18, 192. doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01650-6 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Benos, D. J., Kirk, K. L., and Hall, J. E. (2003). How to review a paper. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 27, 47–52. doi:10.1152/advan.00057.2002 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Britto, C. J., Brady, V., Lee, S., and Dela Cruz, C. S. (2017). Respiratory viral infections in chronic lung diseases. Clin. Chest Med. 38, 87–96. doi:10.1016/j.ccm.2016.11.014 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Cargill, M., and O’Connor, P. (2013). Writing scientific research articles: strategy and steps (Google eBook). 2nd Edn. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Google Scholar Colby, D. J., Sarnecki, M., Barouch, D. H., Tipsuk, S., Stieh, D. J., Kroon, E., et al. (2020). Safety and immunogenicity of Ad26 and MVA vaccines in acutely treated HIV and effect on viral rebound after antiretroviral therapy interruption. Nat. Med. 26, 498–501. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0774-y CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar de Wit, E., Feldmann, F., Cronin, J., Jordan, R., Okumura, A., Thomas, T., et al. (2020). Prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir (GS-5734) treatment in the rhesus macaque model of MERS-CoV infection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 6771–6776. doi:10.1073/pnas.1922083117 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Di Luccia, B., Ahern, P. P., Griffin, N. W., Cheng, J., Guruge, J. L., Byrne, A. E., et al. (2020). Combined prebiotic and microbial intervention improves oral cholera vaccination responses in a mouse model of childhood undernutrition. Cell Host Microbe 27, 899–908. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2020.04.008 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Garbati, M. A., Fagbo, S. F., Fang, V. J., Skakni, L., Joseph, M., Wani, T. A., et al. (2016). A comparative study of clinical presentation and risk factors for adverse outcome in patients hospitalised with acute respiratory disease due to MERS coronavirus or other causes. PLoS One. 11, e0165978. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165978 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Giamarellos-Bourboulis, E. J., Netea, M. G., Rovina, N., Akinosoglou, K., Antoniadou, A., Antonakos, N., et al. (2020). Complex immune dysregulation in COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory failure. Cell Host Microbe 27, 992–1000. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2020.04.009 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Hoffmann, M., Kleine-Weber, H., and Pöhlmann, S. (2020). A multibasic cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is essential for infection of human lung cells. Mol. Cell 78, 779–784. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2020.04.022 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Klein, S. L. (2012). Sex influences immune responses to viruses, and efficacy of prophylaxis and treatments for viral diseases. Bioessays 34, 1050–1059. doi:10.1002/bies.201200099 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Kwon, D. (2020). How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research. Nature 581, 130–131. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-01394-6 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Leung, N. H. L., Chu, D. K. W., Shiu, E. Y. C., Chan, K.-H., McDevitt, J. J., Hau, B. J. P., et al. (2020). Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks. Nat. Med. 26, 676–680. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0843-2 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Lippi, G. (2018). How do I peer-review a scientific article?—a personal perspective. Ann. Transl. Med. 6, 68. doi:10.21037/atm.2017.12.15 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Martin, E. M., Clapp, P. W., Rebuli, M. E., Pawlak, E. A., Glista-Baker, E., Benowitz, N. L., et al. (2016). E-cigarette use results in suppression of immune and inflammatory-response genes in nasal epithelial cells similar to cigarette smoke. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell Mol. Physiol. 311, L135–L144. doi:10.1152/ajplung.00170.2016 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar McPeek, M. A., DeAngelis, D. L., Shaw, R. G., Moore, A. J., Rausher, M. D., Strong, D. R., et al. (2009). The golden rule of reviewing. Am. Nat. 173, E155–E158. doi:10.1086/598847 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Nicola, M., Alsafi, Z., Sohrabi, C., Kerwan, A., Al-Jabir, A., Iosifidis, C., et al. (2020). The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): a review. Int. J. Surg. 78, 185–193. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Oberg, T., and Brosseau, L. M. (2008). Surgical mask filter and fit performance. Am. J. Infect. Contr. 36, 276–282. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2007.07.008 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Rockx, B., Kuiken, T., Herfst, S., Bestebroer, T., Lamers, M. M., Oude Munnink, B. B., et al. (2020). Comparative pathogenesis of COVID-19, MERS, and SARS in a nonhuman primate model. Science 368, 1012–1015. doi:10.1126/science.abb7314 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Salgado, C. M., Azevedo, C., Proença, H., and Vieira, S. M. (2016). “Noise versus outliers,” in Secondary analysis of electronic health records (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), 163–183. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-43742-2_14 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Wang, P., Gajjar, M. R., Yu, J., Padte, N. N., Gettie, A., Blanchard, J. L., et al. (2020). Quantifying the contribution of Fc-mediated effector functions to the antiviral activity of anti-HIV-1 IgG1 antibodies in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 18002. doi:10.1073/pnas.2008190117 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Yi, Y., Lagniton, P. N. P., Ye, S., Li, E., and Xu, R.-H. (2020). COVID-19: what has been learned and to be learned about the novel coronavirus disease. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 16, 1753–1766. doi:10.7150/ijbs.45134 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Keywords: coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome, SARS-CoV-2, infectious disease, pandemic, scientific rigor, research funds Citation: Orellana-Serradell O, Díaz MC, González MF, Gutiérrez M, Herrera D, Jara D, Maureira D, Ruiz-Fuentes JL, Sanhueza S and Leyton L (2020) Does Peer Reviewing for COVID-19-Related Papers Still Work?. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 5:571886. doi: 10.3389/frma.2020.571886 Received: 16 June 2020; Accepted: 22 September 2020; Published: 08 October 2020. Edited by: Reviewed by: Copyright © 2020 Orellana Serradell, Díaz, González, Gutiérrez, Herrera, Jara, Maureira, Ruiz-Fuentes, Sanhueza and Leyton. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. *Correspondence: Lisette Leyton, [email protected]
Published: 8 May 2019
Frontiers in Oncology, Volume 9; https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00365

Abstract:
Editorial on the Research TopicManagement of Immune-Related Adverse Events for Patients Undergoing Treatment With Checkpoint Inhibitors Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors has emerged as the most significant advance in the treatment of cancer in recent years and has revolutionized cancer management (1). Until recently, it had been assumed that the immune system was not effective in protecting humans against the development of neoplastic diseases. Checkpoints inhibitors are co-receptors expressed by T cells. These co-receptors regulate T cell activation negatively and play a central role in the maintenance of peripheral self-tolerance. Co-inhibitory receptor ligands are significantly expressed in a variety of malignancies resulting in evasion of anti-cancer immunity. These molecules include programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and were discovered by Tasuku Honjo and James P. Allison in 1992 and 1996, respectively (2, 3). These scientists were jointly awarded the 2018 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in recognition of this ground-breaking research. Monoclonal antibodies targeting the CTLA-4 and PD-1 and their ligands have produced significant clinical responses against a variety of malignancies (4). FDA registered checkpoint inhibitors include pembrolizumab (5), nivolumab (6), cemiplimab (7), atezolizumab (8), darvolumab (9) and avelumab (10) for numerous indications including melanoma, lung cancer (small and non-small cell types), bladder cancer, Hodgkin's disease and others (5–10). Other co-inhibitory molecules under research include T cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing molecule-3 (TIM-3) (11), Lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3) (12), V-domain Ig-containing Suppressor of T cell Activation (VISTA) (13), and B- and T-lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA) (14). Treatment with antibodies inhi biting immune checkpoints are well-tolerated by the vast majority of patients and are less toxic compared to standard anticancer chemotherapy agents. These immune side-effects are referred to as immune-related adverse events (IrAE) (15). These toxicities include fatigue, dermatological, gastrointestinal, hepatic, pulmonary, endocrine, ocular, neurological, and rare toxicities such as diabetes, cardiac and hematological. Dermatological toxicities can appear following the first dose of an immune checkpoint inhibitor and can be ongoing. These rashes are frequently maculopapular and mild in nature (16). Rash, and generalized pruritus occur more commonly with CTLA-4 inhibitors compared to anti-PD-1 inhibitors (17). Rare cases of serious skin reactions such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis have been reported (18). The development of vitiligo occurs in a small percentage of patients receiving immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors and is associated with long term survival and clinical benefit (19). Gastrointestinal side effects can occur in the form of mucositis, aphthous ulcers, gastritis, colitis, and abdominal pain. Diarrhea, with blood or mucus in the stool, can be observed. In severe cases, these complications can evolve to toxic megacolon and perforation and must be ruled out in patients with peritonitis symptoms (20). Other infectious causes of diarrhea such as Clostridium difficile infection can be associated in severe cases (20). Immune-related pneumonitis is a serious IrAE reported in patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibition. Pneumonitis is more common with PD-1 and PDL-1 blockers, however the incidence is < 1% and presents later during the treatment phase (21). Patients undergoing immunotherapy, experiencing new symptoms of dyspnea or cough, should alert the clinician. This complication could be fatal (21). Endocrine IrAE symptoms are generally non-specific and include fatigue, mental state changes, headaches and dizziness related to hypotension (22). Hypophysitis and hypothyroidism are the most common abnormalities documented (22). Clinicians should screen for thyroid abnormalities and baseline thyroid function tests. Other hormone assays may be indicated in some patients. Ophthalmological IrAE in the form of mild, moderate or severe episcleritis, uveitis or conjunctivitis has been described (23). Neurological IrAE includes posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome, aseptic meningitis, enteric neuropathy, transverse myelitis, and Guillain-Barre syndrome (24). Less frequent IrAE's include red cell aplasia (25), neutropenia (25), acquired hemophilia A (25), thrombocytopenia (25), hemolytic-uremic syndrome (25), pancreatitis (26), asymptomatic raise in amylase and lipase (26), renal insufficiency with nephritis (27), arthritis (28), and myocarditis (Tajiri and Ieda). Contributors to this research topic in Frontiers in Pharmacology and Frontiers in Oncology describe the importance of understanding this new class of drugs and their unique toxicities. Other areas covered include a description the current understanding of the basic mechanism of immune dysregulation in cancer patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment as well as potential predictive strategies for future clinical practice (Anderson and Rapoport). A second manuscript describes an unusual patient with persistent pruritus and lichenoid reaction secondary to anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibitor managed with narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy (Donaldson et al.). A third manuscript explains the management of gastrointestinal toxicity with special reference to the immune homeostasis in the gastrointestinal tract (Dougan) and lastly a meta-analysis describing the relative risk and incidence of immune checkpoint inhibitor related pneumonitis in patients with advanced cancer (Ma et al.). It must be emphasized that IrAEs are usually low-grade and controllable; however, the reporting of these irAEs is generally suboptimal (29). Oncologists should be aware that there is a wide range of additional distinctive toxicities and side effects that can be unpredictable and severe in nature. As these agents will, in the future, be administered with targeted therapies, vaccines, chemotherapy or radiation therapy it is possible that the incidence and severity of these toxocities may change. The different mechanisms of action of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 antibodies resulted in the development of clinical studies investigating combination therapies in a variety of malignancies including metastatic renal cell cancer and metastatic malignant melanoma. The incidence of serious grade 3 and grade 4 adverse events due to the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab were present in approximately half of patients. The incidence of these toxicities was significantly higher than either antibody administered separately resulting in treatment interruption in one-third of patients (30). Clinical recommendations for managing irAEs arise from general clinical consensus and experience, as there are no prospective trials to assess whether one treatment strategy is superior to another. Although controversial; there are reports suggesting that the development of irAEs is associated with improvement in survival in patients with advanced or recurrent malignancy treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (31). Finally, early detection of IrAEs and proactive and adressive management by clinicians is critical to lower morbidity and mortality. The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication. MDS: Advisory Board and Speaker Engagements; BMS: Advisory Board and Speaker Engagements; AstraZeneca: Advisory Board and Speaker Engagements. 1. D'Arrigo P, Tufano M, Rea A, Vigorito V, Novizio N, Russo S, et al. Manipulation of the immune system for cancer defeat: a focus on the T cell inhibitory checkpoint molecules. Curr Med Chem. (2018). doi: 10.2174/0929867325666181106114421. [Epub ahead of print]. PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 2. Ishida Y, Agata Y, Shibahara K, Honjo T. Induced expression of PD-1, a novel member of the immunoglobulin gene superfamily, upon programmed cell death. EMBO J. (1992) 11:3887–95. PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar 3. Leach DR, Krummel MF, Allison JP. Enhancement of antitumor immunity by CTLA-4 blockade. Science. (1996) 271:1734–6. PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar 4. Sledzinska A, Menger L, Bergerhoff K, Peggs KS, Quezada SA. Negative immune checkpoints on T lymphocytes and their relevance to cancer immunotherapy. Mol Oncol. (2015) 10:1936–65. doi: 10.1016/j.molonc.2015.10.008 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 5. Khoja L, Butler MO, Kang SP, Ebbinghaus S, Joshua AM. Pembrolizumab. J Immunother Cancer. (2015) 3:36. doi: 10.1186/s40425-015-0078-9 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 6. Scott LJ. Nivolumab: a review in advanced melanoma. Drugs. (2015) 12:1413–24. doi: 10.1007/s40265-015-0442-6 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 7. Markham A, Duggan S. Cemiplimab: first global approval. Drugs. (2018) 17:1841–6. doi: 10.1007/s40265-018-1012-5 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 8. Shah NJ, Kelly WJ, Liu SV, Choquette K, Spira A. Product review on the Anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab. Hum Vaccin Immunother. (2018) 2:269–76. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2017.1403694 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 9. Syed YY. Durvalumab: first global approval. Drugs. (2017) 12:1369–76. doi: 10.1007/s40265-017-0782-5 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 10. Kim ES. Avelumab: first global approval. Drugs. (2017) 8:929–37. doi: 10.1007/s40265-017-0749-6 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 11. Du W, Yang M, Turner A, Xu C, Ferris RL, Huang J, et al. TIM-3 as a Target for cancer immunotherapy and mechanisms of action. Int J Mol Sci. (2017) 3:E645. doi: 10.3390/ijms18030645 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 12. Andrews LP, Marciscano AE, Drake CG, Vignali DA. LAG3 (CD223) as a cancer immunotherapy target. Immunol Rev. (2017) 1:80–96. doi: 10.1111/imr.12519 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 13. Nowak EC, Lines JL, Varn FS, Deng J, Sarde A, Mabaera R, et al. Immunoregulatory functions of VISTA. Immunol Rev. (2017) 1:66–79. doi: 10.1111/imr.12525 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 14. Spodzieja M, Lach S, Iwaszkiewicz J, Cesson V, Kalejta K, Olive D, et al. Design of short peptides to block BTLA/HVEM interactions for promoting anticancer T-cell responses. PLoS ONE. (2017) 6:e0179201. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179201 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 15. Baxi S, Yang A, Gennarelli RL, Khan N, Wang Z, Boyce L, et al. Immune-related adverse events for anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 drugs: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. (2018) 360:k793. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k793 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 16. Sibaud V. Dermatologic reactions to immune checkpoint inhibitors: skin toxicities and immunotherapy. Am J Clin Dermatol. (2018) 3:345–61. doi: 10.1007/s40257-017-0336-3 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 17. Villadolid J, Amin A. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice: update on management of immune-related toxicities. Transl Lung Cancer Res. (2015) 5:560–75. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.06.06 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 18. Weber JS, Kähler KC, Hauschild A. Management of immune-related adverse events and kinetics of response with ipilimumab. J Clin Oncol. (2012) 21:2691–7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.41.6750 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 19. Hua C, Boussemart L, Mateus C, Routier E, Boutros C, Cazenave H, et al. Association of vitiligo with tumor response in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with pembrolizumab. JAMA Dermatol. (2016) 1:45–51. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.2707 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 20. Rapoport BL, van Eeden R, Sibaud V, Epstein JB, Klastersky J, Aapro M, et al. Supportive care for patients undergoing immunotherapy. Support Care Cancer. (2017) 10:3017–30. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3802-9 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 21. Possick JD. Pulmonary toxicities from checkpoint immunotherapy for malignancy. Clin Chest Med. (2017) 2:223–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2016.12.012 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 22. Sznol M, Postow MA, Davies MJ, Pavlick AC, Plimack ER, Shaheen M, et al. Endocrine-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade and expert insights on their management. Cancer Treat Rev. (2017) 58:70–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.06.002 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 23. Antoun J, Titah C, Cochereau I. Ocular and orbital side-effects of checkpoint inhibitors: a review article. Curr Opin Oncol. (2016) 4:288–94. doi: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000296 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 24. Touat M, Talmasov D, Ricard D, Psimaras D. Neurological toxicities associated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Curr Opin Neurol. (2017) 6:659–68. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000503 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 25. Delanoy N, Michot JM, Comont T, Kramkimel N, Lazarovici J, Dupont R, et al. Haematological immune-related adverse events induced by anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy: a descriptive observational study. Lancet Haematol. (2019) 1:e48–57. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30175-3 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 26. Ikeuchi K, Okuma Y, Tabata T. Immune-related pancreatitis secondary to nivolumab in a patient with recurrent lung adenocarcinoma: a case report. Lung Cancer. (2016) 99:148–50. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.07.001 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 27. Murakami N, Motwani S, Riella LV. Renal complications of immune checkpoint blockade. Curr Probl Cancer. (2017) 2:100–10. doi: 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2016.12.004 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 28. Cappelli LC, Gutierrez AK, Baer AN, Albayda J, Manno RL, Haque U, et al. Inflammatory arthritis and sicca syndrome induced by nivolumab and ipilimumab. Ann Rheum Dis. (2017) 1:43–50. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209595 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 29. Chen TW, Razak AR, Bedard PL, Siu LL, Hansen AR. A systematic review of immune-related adverse event reporting in clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Ann Oncol. (2015) 9:1824–9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv182 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 30. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, Lao CD, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. (2015) 1:23–34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504030 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 31. Ricciuti B, Genova C, De Giglio A, Bassanelli M, Dal Bello MG, Metro G, et al. Impact of immune-related adverse events on survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with nivolumab: long-term outcomes from a multi-institutional analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. (2019) 2:479–85. doi: 10.1007/s00432-018-2805-3 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Keywords: immune related adverse effects, colitis, pneumonitis, anti CTLA 4, anti-PD 1 Citation: Rapoport BL (2019) Editorial: Management of Immune-Related Adverse Events for Patients Undergoing Treatment With Checkpoint Inhibitors. Front. Oncol. 9:365. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00365 Received: 28 February 2019; Accepted: 18 April 2019; Published: 08 May 2019. Edited and reviewed by: Copyright © 2019 Rapoport. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. *Correspondence: Bernardo Leon Rapoport, [email protected]
, Angelica Lindén Hirschberg, Trine Moholdt
Published: 20 January 2021
Frontiers in Physiology, Volume 11; https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.615468

Abstract:
Editorial on the Research TopicExercise and Sport: Their Influences on Women's Health Across the Lifespan This Research Topic of Frontiers in Physiology is dedicated to the memory of Professor Nigel Stepto, the Lead Guest Editor of this issue, who sadly passed away during its formation. Prof. Stepto was a passionate and recognized world leader in the field of Exercise Physiology with outstanding contributions, particularly in the area of women's reproductive health. Nigel's research passion was in understanding the mechanistic effects of exercise for health and therapy with a special interest in insulin resistance and polycystic ovary syndrome, the leading cause of anovulatory infertility in young women of reproductive age. He was the co-Deputy Director—Research Training at the Institute of Health and Sport (IHeS) at Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia, and held adjunct associate professorial roles at Monash University and the University of Melbourne. He was Chair of the Exercise and Sports Science Association (ESSA) Research Committee, Project Director of the Australian Institute for Musculoskeletal Science (AIMSS) and an active member of the Australian Physiological Society (AuPS). Alongside his influential research career and leadership roles, Nigel was a strong advocate for post-graduate and early career researchers. His collaborative nature and approach to research ensured those mentored by him were considered, included and valued members across his many research projects and initiatives. Nigel's impact and influence on the careers of early researchers will continue at Victoria University with both a Nigel Stepto Travel Award and Nigel Stepto Ph.D. Scholarship established in his honor. Nigel was great friend and colleague to many and is very much missed. Nigel is survived by his wife, Fiona and two children Matilda (14 years) and Harriet (11 years). Vale, Professor Nigel Stepto (12 September 1971−4 February 2020). Physiological responses and adaptations to exercise that influence both health and sports performance is a broad and well-documented area of research with acute and prolonged effects now widely understood. Resultantly, exercise is recognized as a potent therapy for the prevention and treatment of chronic disease in adults. Yet a significant research gender bias toward males remains with research elucidating differential reproductive and life-phase effects across clinical exercise, exercise and sports science in women, currently limited. This Research Topic was introduced to better explore physiological responses to exercise in women across the spectrum of health promotion to sports performance and the interplay of the reproductive lifespan on health and performance outcomes. This Research Topic consists of nine articles, including six original research articles, two narrative review articles, and one systematic review and meta-analysis. A broad range of themes are covered across female exercise physiology, including the role of hormonal regulation and inflammation on exercise performance; the beneficial role of exercise in anovulatory conditions including polycystic ovary syndrome and perspectives of exercise during pregnancy and its role in hypertensive disorders. Fluctuation in ovarian hormone levels induces physiological alterations that can produce differences in exercise performance during the menstrual cycle (Janse de Jonge, 2003). For example, progesterone has been shown to increase ventilation and body temperature at rest (Marsh and Jenkins, 2002), whereas oestradiol modulates vascular flow (Joyner et al., 2015). Mandrup et al. investigated how menopausal status and high intensity exercise training influence adipose tissue mass, glucose uptake and protein content. They demonstrate similar improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness and decreases in subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue mass following 3 months' training in pre- and post-menopausal women. They also report of similar insulin-stimulated glucose uptake in abdominal, gluteal, and femoral adipose tissue depots in pre- vs. post-menopausal women, in contrast to earlier findings from the same trial showering skeletal muscle insulin resistance in post- compared to premenopausal women (Mandrup et al., 2018). High-repetition, low-load resistance training in group class settings has gained popularity for weight control, especially among women. One example of this type of training is BodyPump (Les Mills International), which is claimed to result in high energy expenditure. Rustaden et al. assessed energy expenditure during BodyPump compared with heavy load resistance exercise using indirect calorimetry in women who were overweight and found that both training modalities produced similar energy expenditure during and up to 140 min after the exercise session. Pereira et al. summarized the effects of the ovarian hormone fluctuations during the menstrual cycle on exercise-induced fatigability in a mini-review based on 46 studies comparing the follicular phase with the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. In total, 15 studies demonstrated a statistical difference between the menstrual cycle phases studied. However, the results were inconsistent with seven studies reporting less fatigability during the luteal phase and eight studies reporting less fatigability during the follicular phase. The inconsistences could be explained by differences in exercise mode, the limb used, type of contraction and the classification of the menstrual cycle phase. The authors concluded that further studies are needed to determine the effects of a specific menstrual cycle phase on exercise-induced fatigability. Exogenous hormones introduced through oral contraceptive use have also been found to influence exercise capacity (Lebrun et al., 2003) and change the metabolic, cardiovascular, and ventilatory responses to exercise (Charkoudian and Joyner, 2004; Isacco et al., 2012; Schaumberg et al., 2017). Schaumberg et al. observed a dampened response of central physiological adaptations to sprint interval training, demonstrated by pulmonary oxygen uptake kinetics, in women taking oral contraceptives compared to women with natural menstrual cycles. The potential underlying mechanisms for these observations include the influence of exogenous hormones on the overall endocrinological profile. Again, more knowledge is needed regarding the effect of oral contraceptives on exercise training adaptations. In another study by Larsen et al., blood samples were collected from 53 elite female athletes prior to the Rio Olympic Games. The study showed that those who were taking oral contraceptives had higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) in the blood than those without hormonal contraception. CRP is a marker of inflammation and tissue damage, and it was suggested that this marker could have potential consequences for athlete performance and recovery. Other markers of stress and inflammation were comparable between groups. Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common endocrine disorder among women of reproductive age and characterized by anovulation, hyperandrogenism, and polycystic ovarian morphology (Charkoudian and Joyner, 2004). This condition is highly associated with reproductive, metabolic and mental complications. Insulin resistance and obesity are important etiological factors contributing to the severity of the symptoms. Lifestyle intervention, including exercise, is recommended as a first-choice therapy to improve health outcomes (Charkoudian and Joyner, 2004). However, it is unclear what kind of exercise is most effective. Patten et al. performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise interventions in PCOS. Based on 19 articles and 777 women, it was demonstrated that exercise training improved cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, and insulin resistance. It was also clear that improvements were dependent on exercise intensity rather than duration. The results suggest that a minimum of 120 min of vigorous intensity per week is needed to provide beneficial health outcomes for women with PCOS. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression post-transcriptionally and have been suggested to be of importance for the pathophysiology of insulin resistance in PCOS. Lionett et al. studied circulating and adipose tissue miRNAs in women with PCOS compared to controls and in response to randomized low-volume or high-volume high intensity interval training. They found that women with PCOS have higher circulating levels of miRNA-27b compared to non-PCOS women but comparable adipose tissue miRNAs. miRNA-27b has been implicated in several metabolic and cellular processes, such as fatty acid metabolism, adipocyte differentiation and inflammation (Chen et al., 2012). In response to 16 weeks of low-, but not high-volume, high intensity training, levels of miRNA-27b were reduced. The clinical significance of these findings needs to be studied further. European and American guidelines advocate that pregnant women should be physically active at least 150 min/week to optimize gestational weight gain and prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as gestational diabetes and hypertensive disorders (2015; Gynaecologists RCoO, 2015). However, <15% of pregnant women adhere to these recommendations (Gjestland et al., 2013). This Research Topic contains a Mini Review (Witvrouwen et al.) on the effects of exercise training during pregnancy on vascular health, with a focus on gestational hypertensive disorders (gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia). Conflicting reports were found with a need for further research to fully elucidate efficacy of exercise in reducing risk of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy. The largest systematic review [22 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), n= 5,316] and meta-analysis to date showed that exercise during pregnancy significantly reduced the risk of gestational hypertension (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43–0.85), as well as pre-eclampsia (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37–0.94) (15 RCTs, n = 3,322) (Davenport et al., 2018). However, five out of nine systematic reviews and meta-analyses showed no significant effect. The authors suggest that the discrepancies may be caused by different methodological issues. Yet given the benefits of regular physical activity on health and well-being generally, health care providers should be encouraged to discuss lifestyle behaviors with pregnant women to optimize maternal and child health outcomes. Health care provider perspectives on lifestyle advice, during pregnancy, weight gain, physical activity, and nutrition was explored by Haakstad et al. While most midwives viewed lifestyle counseling as important, nearly 40% did not give advice on gestational weight gain or gave advice discordant with the recommendations from the Institute of Medicine (Rasmussen and Yaktine, 2009), emphasizing the need for increased support and guidance for health professionals initiating healthy lifestyle conversations during pregnancy. The manuscripts included in this Research Topic contribute to much needed research into the role and influence of reproduction on physiological responses to exercise across the spectrum of female exercise physiology. Beneficial effects of exercise are reported underscoring its importance in women's health broadly. Yet importantly, as a collective, this issue emphasizes the many research gaps that remain. Exercise intervention studies are largely heterogeneous by nature, with significant variation in type, duration, frequency and intensity as well as in their overall reach, penetration and compliance. Reporting quality across studies introduces variation in the identification of particular components of exercise that contribute to positive outcomes. Taken together, this contributes to ambiguity in the field and limits translation and implementation of clinical recommendations. This issue highlights the critical need for further high quality, robustly designed research with transparent reporting in this area of exercise physiology. CH and TM drafted the manuscript, with input from ALH. All authors approved the final version. TM was supported by a European Foundation for the Study of Diabetes/Novo Nordisk Foundation Future Leaders Award (NNF19SA058975) and ALH was supported by the Swedish Research Council for Sport Science. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. (2015). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 650: physical activity and exercise during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Obstetr. Gynecol. 126, e135–e142. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001214 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Charkoudian, N., and Joyner, M. J. (2004). Physiologic considerations for exercise performance in women. Clin. Chest Med. 25, 247–255. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2004.01.001 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Chen, W., Yin, K., Zhao, G., Fy, Y., and Tang, C. (2012). The magic and mystery of microRNA-27 in atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis 222, 314–323. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2012.01.020 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Davenport, M. H., Ruchat, S., Poitras, V. J., Garcia, A. J., Gray, C. E., Barrowman, N., et al. (2018). Prenatal exercise for the prevention of gestational diabetes mellitus and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Sport Med. 52, 1367–1375. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099355 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Gjestland, K., Bo, K., Owe, K. M., and Eberhard-Gran, M. (2013). Do pregnant women follow exercise guidelines? Prevalence data among 3482 women, and prediction of low-back pain, pelvic girdle pain and depression. Br. J. Sports Med. 47, 515–520. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091344 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Gynaecologists RCoO (2015). Physical Activity and Pregnancy. Available online at: www.rcog.org.uk (accessed June 29, 2017). Google Scholar Isacco, L., Duché, P., and Boisseau, N. (2012). Influence of hormonal status on substrate utilization at rest and during exercise in the female population. Sports Med. 42, 327–342. doi: 10.2165/11598900-000000000-00000 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Janse de Jonge, X. A. (2003). Effects of the menstrual cycle on exercise performance. Sports Med. 33, 833–851. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200333110-00004 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Joyner, M. J., Barnes, J. N., Hart, E. C., Wallin, B. G., and Charkoudian, N. (2015). Neural control of the circulation: how sex and age differences interact in humans. Comprehensive Physiol. 5, 193–215. doi: 10.1002/cphy.c140005 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Lebrun, C. M., Petit, M. A., McKenzie, D. C., Taunton, J. E., and Prior, J. C. (2003). Decreased maximal aerobic capacity with use of a triphasic oral contraceptive in highly active women: a randomised controlled trial. Br. J. Sports Med. 37, 315–320. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.37.4.315 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Mandrup, C. M., Egelund, J., Nyberg, M., Enevoldsen, L. H., Kjær, A., Clemmensen, A. E., et al. (2018). Effects of menopause and high-intensity training on insulin sensitivity and muscle metabolism. Menopause 25, 165–175. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000000981 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Marsh, S. A., and Jenkins, D. G. (2002). Physiological responses to the menstrual cycle: implications for the development of heat illness in female athletes. Sports Med. 32, 601–614. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200232100-00001 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Rasmussen, K. M., and Yaktine, A. L. (2009). Weight Gain During Pregnancy: Reexamining the Guidelines. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Schaumberg, M. A., Jenkins, D. G., de Janse, J. X. A., Emmerton, L. M., and Skinner, T. L. (2017). Oral contraceptive use dampens physiological adaptations to sprint interval training. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 49, 717–727. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001171 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Keywords: inflammation, contraceptives, adipose tissue, polycystic ovary syndrome, pregnancy, endurance training, strength training Citation: Harrison CL, Hirschberg AL and Moholdt T (2021) Editorial: Exercise and Sport: Their Influences on Women's Health Across the Lifespan. Front. Physiol. 11:615468. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.615468 Received: 09 October 2020; Accepted: 21 December 2020; Published: 20 January 2021. Edited by: Reviewed by: Copyright © 2021 Harrison, Hirschberg and Moholdt. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. *Correspondence: Cheryce L. Harrison, [email protected]
Jiao Liu, Yue-Tian Yu, Chun-Hui Xu, De-Chang Chen
Published: 4 February 2021
Frontiers in Medicine, Volume 7; https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2020.598037

Abstract:
Candida spp. is one of the most important components of human microecology. Among hospitalized patients, the isolation rate of Candida spp. by active screening is about 15%, while in critically ill patients, the rate can be as high as 25% (1). Although microbial colonization plays an important role in secondary infections, Candida pneumonia is seldom documented even in the intensive care unit (ICU). Thus, the common consensus is that anti-Candida therapy is rarely necessary in most cases and it should be considered as colonization in which Candida spp. are isolated from the respiratory tract (RT) (2). The co-existence of bacteria and fungi has raised great concern in the last decade. It has been indicated by some studies that Candida colonization in the RT might be an independent risk factor that could promote ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and even change the antibiotic resistance patterns of pathogenic bacteria by polymicrobial biofilm formation (3, 4). Therefore, the significance of Candida colonization in RT remains controversial, and many clinical problems need to be reinterpreted. The rate of Candida spp. isolation in the RT is relatively high, especially in those with mechanical ventilation (MV) (3). However, whether VAP can be caused by Candida spp. remains controversial and the main reasons for this are listed as follows: (1) No matter what the pathogenic microorganism is, the diagnosis of VAP is still difficult due to the lack of pathological evidence. The clinical diagnostic criteria for suspected VAP are not specific, and it is difficult to distinguish between colonization and infection (5). (2) The understanding of the importance of bacterial and fungal co-existence is not deep enough. Some microbiological laboratories have not conducted further analysis when fast-growing Candida spp. are isolated from RT samples. What's more, only filamentous fungi isolation were reported in some institutions (6). (3) It is widely accepted that the cutoff value for the number of pathogenic bacteria for VAP diagnosis is 103 cfu/mL (protected specimen brush sample) or 104 cfu/mL (bronchoalveolar lavage fluid sample), but such a threshold has not yet been established for Candida (5). Therefore, Candida pneumonia must be diagnosed by histopathology. Hence, it is generally thought that Candida pneumonia is quite rare in the ICU, and the guidelines for the management of Candida spp. of both the IDSA and ESCMID do not recommend antifungal treatment unless there is clear histological evidence of infection (2, 7). Alveolar macrophages act as the first line of defense against Candida in critically ill patients. Toll-like receptor (TLR) induces a Th1 cytokine pattern to increase the levels of IFN-γ and TNF-α to facilitate the clearance of Candida spores from the alveoli. What is more, other researches have also indicated that IFN-γ favors the intracellular killing of the fungus after internalization in professional phagocytes (8). Thus, it can be inferred that Candida pneumonia may not exist in the ICU. An autopsy study with 135 patients who died of pneumonia showed that among them, 77 (57%) severely affected patients had Candida airway colonization during their hospital stay. However, none of these cases was pathologically confirmed as Candida pneumonia (9). Meanwhile, one controlled before-after study in a microbiology laboratory at Illinois University showed that limiting the identification of respiratory secretions (only filamentous fungi were reported) could reduce the prescription of antifungal drug treatment (21 vs. 39%) and shorten the length of hospital stay (10.1 vs. 12.1 days) compared with full identification (all rapidly growing yeasts were reported), p< 0.05 (6). What should ICU physicians do when they receive a microbial culture report which indicates that Candida spp. are growing fast in airway secretions? The practice guidelines recommend that antifungal therapy should not be routinely used in those with Candida airway colonization (2, 7). However, should Candida colonization in the airway of critically ill patients simply be ignored? Some in vitro experiments on the co-existence of bacteria and fungi came to different conclusions. The cell wall of Candida spp. is combined with polysaccharides and proteins. Among them, Beta-glucan (BG) is a proinflammatory factor that can cause dysfunction of macrophages and neutrophils in alveoli as well as reduce the production of reactive oxygen species (10). It is also reported that there is a strong interaction among Candida, Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria through quorum sensing (QS) molecules, and the extensive interaction of metabolic processes and intercellular communication among them are the basis of synergistic and antagonistic interactions (11). Through an observational study of rats injected with active Candida albicans, it was found that the increased production of cellular inflammatory factors, including interleukin-6, interferon-γ and tumor necrosis factor-α, inhibited phagocytosis by alveolar macrophages. This phenomenon led to changes in airway microecology, and an increase in the airway colonization rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa was found (12). Moreover, this effect was not unique to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Another study showed that Candida colonization was also beneficial for the colonization of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterobacteriaceae, which led to an increase in bacterial pneumonia (13). Candida biofilms show a reticular structure composed of Candida spores and hyphae and are easily found on the surfaces of artificial materials (such as endotracheal tubes). The biofilm matrix contains polysaccharides, proteins and other unknown components, which show strong adhesion and are difficult to remove (14) (Figure 1). Biofilms not only have a protective effect on Candida but also have a strong adsorption effect on co-existing bacteria. Animal experiments and electron microscopic studies show that bacteria and fungi can produce small molecules to interact with each other and change their morphology, function and growth environment, resulting in bacteria that are firmly adsorbed between Candida spores or biofilms. Such structures are difficult to remove. Even though the spore activity of some Candida spp. is decreased, the adsorption phenomenon is still observed (4, 15). Figure 1. Interaction of Candida spp. and bacteria in patients with mechanical ventilation. Candida biofilms are easily found on the respiratory tract or the surfaces of endotracheal tubes. Biofilms not only have a protective effect on Candida but also have a strong adsorption effect on co-existing bacteria. Multidrug-resistant bacteria could be isolated by the transmission of drug-resistant plasmid transmission and polymicrobial biofilm formation (Drawn by Chunhui Xu). Candida colonization can also change the virulence and/or host immune function of colonized bacteria. A series of animal experiments have shown that after the mixed inoculation of Candida and bacteria in the airway of mice, even if the number of inoculated Candida is very small, the bacterial load still occupies a high percentage of the alveoli. It has been suggested that the presence of Candida albicans protects the bacteria from clearance by normal alveolar macrophages (16). Acinetobacter baumannii can affect the morphology of Candida albicans through the QS molecule N-acyl homoserine lactone, whereas farnesol is the main QS molecule of Candida albicans (11). This can affect the movement ability and virulence factor expression of Acinetobacter baumannii. An animal experiment has also found that the degree of alveolar invasiveness of Acinetobacter baumannii in mice with Candida colonization during pneumonia is much higher than that of Acinetobacter baumannii during pulmonary infection (17). The existence of biofilms can also increase the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics. It is showed that Staphylococcus aureus could form a single biofilm (monoculture biofilm) in serum, but its integrity was poor, and it was easy to dissociate. If there is co-growth with Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus can form microcolonies on the fungal biofilm, which is closely connected to the bottom hyphae “scaffold,” to form a multi-bacterial biofilm (polymicrobial biofilm) (Supplementary Figure 1). Staphylococcus aureus matrix staining showed different phenotypes of multi-bacterial biofilms and single cell membranes (18), indicating that Staphylococcus aureus may be encapsulated in the matrix secreted by Candida albicans, resulting in an increase in its resistance to vancomycin. Further studies showed that in the environment of multi-bacterial biofilm formation, 27 Staphylococcus aureus-specific proteins were identified by gel electrophoresis, some of which could upregulate the expression of L-lactate dehydrogenase I, confer the ability to resist host-derived oxidative stress to bacteria and enhance resistance to antibiotics, while other proteins could downregulate the expression of the virulence factor CodY (19). These findings suggest that the occurrence of VAP caused by MRSA in patients with Candida albicans airway colonization is not only the result of the expression of QS molecules but can also be attributed to the differential regulation of specific drug resistance genes and virulence factors. Similar results have been obtained in other studies of Gram-negative bacteria (20, 21). In vitro studies suggest that there is mutual induction of the process of the co-existence of bacteria and fungi, so it is necessary to further describe and study the complex interactions between pathogens at the molecular level. The transition from basic research to clinical research may help to design new treatment or prevention and control strategies for bacterial and fungal superinfection. Clinical studies have pointed out that the isolation rate of Candida from the RT of ICU patients with MV could be as high as 50%, which prolonged the median hospital stay (59.9 vs. 38.6 days, p = 0.006) or even increased the hospital mortality (34.2 vs. 21.0%, p = 0.003) (22). Moreover, it might be associated with persistent immunosuppression and inflammation (23). Candida airway colonization and its concomitant secretion of inflammatory factors may affect host cellular immune function, especially in immunosuppressed hosts with severe monocyte and lymphocyte dysfunction, which results in a decrease in the effective clearance of bacteria and fungi and an increase in the incidence of VAP (24). However, the effect of Candida RT colonization on bacterial colonization and antibacterial resistance patterns has always been controversial in clinical research. It is still unclear whether Candida airway colonization could increase the incidence of VAP and whether patients with Candida airway colonization can benefit from antifungal therapy (Supplementary Table 1). One early prospective cohort study reported that Candida RT colonization could increase the incidence of VAP caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9 vs. 4.8%, p = 0.048), and Candida RT colonization was proven to be an independent risk factor (18). Similarly, another single-center retrospective case-control study indicated that antifungal therapy in those with Candida albicans airway colonization could prevent the occurrence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa VAP (25). Some studies have also pointed out that Candida airway colonization is associated with the pathogenesis of Acinetobacter baumannii VAP. In addition, another cohort study showed that aerosol inhalation of amphotericin B in patients with MV significantly reduced the Candida load in the airway but did not change the morbidity due to VAP or mortality during the ICU stay (26, 27). The EMPIRICUS study is a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of micafungin for the treatment of patients with Candida colonization in multiple sites and sepsis with organ failure (28). The study noted that the incidence of VAP and the 28-days mortality during the ICU stay did not decrease in the micafungin group compared with those in the placebo group (32 vs. 39.8%, p > 0.05). Therefore, the above studies led to a change in the understanding of the co-existence of bacteria and fungi and their effects on immune function in clinical studies. FUNGIBACT, as a prospective cohort study, included 146 patients with MV for more than 96 h. After adjusting for the immune index mHLA-DR, it was concluded that there was no correlation between airway Candida colonization and the incidence of VAP [HR: 0.98; 95% CI (0.59–1.65), p = 0.95] (29). Another retrospective study reviewed 269 systemic lupus erythematosus patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia. Among them, 186 (69.1%) were found to have airway Candida colonization. Compared with that in the non-colonized group, the detection rate of multidrug-resistant bacteria was higher (58.6 vs. 36.1%, p< 0.001), and the secreted IgA and IL-17 levels returned to normal range faster after anti-fungal treatment, but this had no effect on 28-days mortality (14.5 vs. 10.8, p > 0.05) (30). One meta-analysis about the influence of Candida spp. airway colonization on clinical outcomes in patients with VAP included four prospective studies, three retrospective studies, and one cross-sectional study (31). It revealed that those with airway Candida colonization had longer durations of MV. The most noteworthy feature of the meta-analysis is that patients with Candida colonization had higher 28-days mortality (RR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.27–2.12) and ICU mortality (RR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.26–1.94) than those without Candida colonization. Although it has included almost all the clinical research about airway Candida colonization with high quality, limitations still exist. First, attributable mortality rate could hardly find in these studies duo to the effects of confounding factors and the insufficient sample size. Second, a highly heterogeneity could be recognized in the baseline of the enrolled patients. Reasons for MV, severity of VAP, antibiotic exposures before the diagnosis of VAP and the immune state was probably diverse among studies. Although “Candida pneumonia” is rarely confirmed in critically ill patients, Candida airway colonization may affect bacterial colonization and antibacterial resistance patterns, playing an important role in the development of bacterial pneumonia. However, the conclusions of current clinical studies are not consistent. Future clinical studies are needed to re-evaluate the potential benefits of pre-emptive antifungal therapy for preventing VAP. Y-TY and JL: conception and design. D-CC: administrative support. C-HX: provision of study materials or patients. Y-TY and C-HX: data analysis and interpretation. All authors: collection and assembly of data, manuscript writing, and final approval of manuscript. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2020.598037/full#supplementary-material 1. Epelbaum O, Chasan R. Candidemia in the intensive care unit. Clin Chest Med. (2017) 38:493–509. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2017.04.010 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 2. Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes DR, Clancy CJ, Marr KA, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of Candidiasis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. (2016) 62:e1–50. doi: 10.1093/cid/civ933 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 3. Hamet M, Pavon A, Dalle F, Pechinot A, Prin S, Quenot JP, et al. Candida spp. airway colonization could promote antibiotic-resistant bacteria selection in patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Intensive Care Med. (2012) 38:1272–9. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2584-2 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 4. Gabrilska RA, Rumbaugh KP. Biofilm models of polymicrobial infection. Future Microbiol. (2015) 10:1997–2015. doi: 10.2217/fmb.15.109 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 5. Kalil AC, Metersky ML, Klompas M, Muscedere J, Sweeney DA, Palmer LB, et al. Management of adults with hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia: 2016 clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society. Clin Infect Dis. (2016) 63:e61–111. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw353 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 6. Barenfanger J, Arakere P, Cruz RD, Imran A, Drake C, Lawhorn J, et al. Improved outcomes associated with limiting identification of Candida spp. in respiratory secretions. J Clin Microbiol. (2003) 41:5645–9. doi: 10.1128/jcm.41.12.5645-5649.2003 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 7. Martin-Loeches I, Antonelli M, Cuenca-Estrella M, Dimopoulos G, Einav S, De Waele JJ, et al. ESICM/ESCMID task force on practical management of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. (2019) 45:789–805. doi: 10.1007/s00134-019-05599-w PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 8. Shao TY, Ang WXG, Jiang TT, Huang FS, Andersen H, Kinder JM, et al. Commensal Candida albicans positively calibrates systemic Th17 immunological responses. Cell Host Microbe. (2019) 25:404–17 e6. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2019.02.004 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 9. Meersseman W, Lagrou K, Spriet I, Maertens J, Verbeken E, Peetermans WE, et al. Significance of the isolation of Candida species from airway samples in critically ill patients: a prospective, autopsy study. Intensive Care Med. (2009) 35:1526–31. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1482-8 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 10. Netea MG, Brown GD, Kullberg BJ, Gow NA. An integrated model of the recognition of Candida albicans by the innate immune system. Nat Rev Microbiol. (2008) 6:67–78. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro1815 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 11. Sedlmayer F, Hell D, Muller M, Auslander D, Fussenegger M. Designer cells programming quorum-sensing interference with microbes. Nat Commun. (2018) 9:1822. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04223-7 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 12. Perez-Rodriguez G, Dias S, Perez-Perez M, Fdez-Riverola F, Azevedo NF, Lourenco A. Agent-based model of diffusion of N-acyl homoserine lactones in a multicellular environment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Candida albicans. Biofouling. (2018) 34:335–45. doi: 10.1080/08927014.2018.1440392 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 13. Meto A, Colombari B, Sala A, Pericolini E, Meto A, Peppoloni S, et al. Antimicrobial and antibiofilm efficacy of a copper/calcium hydroxide-based endodontic paste against Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Candida albicans. Dent Mater J. (2019) 38:591–603. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2018-252 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 14. Gulati M, Nobile CJ. Candida albicans biofilms: development, regulation, and molecular mechanisms. Microbes Infect. (2016) 18:310–21. doi: 10.1016/j.micinf.2016.01.002 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 15. Lohse MB, Gulati M, Johnson AD, Nobile CJ. Development and regulation of single- and multi-species Candida albicans biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol. (2018) 16:19–31. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro.2017.107 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 16. Ardizzoni A, Pericolini E, Paulone S, Orsi CF, Castagnoli A, Oliva I, et al. In vitro effects of commercial mouthwashes on several virulence traits of Candida albicans, viridans streptococci and Enterococcus faecalis colonizing the oral cavity. PLoS ONE. (2018) 13:e0207262. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207262 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 17. Tan X, Chen R, Zhu S, Wang H, Yan D, Zhang X, et al. Candida albicans airway colonization facilitates subsequent Acinetobacter baumannii pneumonia in a rat model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. (2016) 60:3348–54. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02180-15 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 18. Green IM, Margoni I, Nair SP, Petridis H. Adhesion of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Candida albicans to parylene-C-coated polymethyl methacrylate. Int J Prosthodont. (2019) 32:193–5. doi: 10.11607/ijp.5918 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 19. Waters NR, Samuels DJ, Behera RK, Livny J, Rhee KY, Sadykov MR, et al. A spectrum of CodY activities drives metabolic reorganization and virulence gene expression in Staphylococcus aureus. Mol Microbiol. (2016) 101:495–514. doi: 10.1111/mmi.13404 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 20. Padder SA, Prasad R, Shah AH. Quorum sensing: a less known mode of communication among fungi. Microbiol Res. (2018) 210:51–8. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2018.03.007 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 21. Albert M, Williamson D, Muscedere J, Lauzier F, Rotstein C, Kanji S, et al. Candida in the respiratory tract secretions of critically ill patients and the impact of antifungal treatment: a randomized placebo controlled pilot trial (CANTREAT study). Intensive Care Med. (2014) 40:1313–22. doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3352-2 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 22. Delisle MS, Williamson DR, Perreault MM, Albert M, Jiang X, Heyland DK. The clinical significance of Candida colonization of respiratory tract secretions in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. (2008) 23:11–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.01.005 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 23. Huang Y, Jiao Y, Zhang J, Xu J, Cheng Q, Li Y, et al. Microbial etiology and prognostic factors of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a multicenter retrospective study in Shanghai. Clin Infect Dis. (2018) 67:S146–52. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy686 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 24. Delisle MS, Williamson DR, Albert M, Perreault MM, Jiang X, Day AG, et al. Impact of Candida species on clinical outcomes in patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Can Respir J. (2011) 18:131–6. doi: 10.1155/2011/827692 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 25. Mear JB, Kipnis E, Faure E, Dessein R, Schurtz G, Faure K, et al. Candida albicans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa interactions: more than an opportunistic criminal association? Med Mal Infect. (2013) 43:146–51. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2013.02.005 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 26. van der Geest PJ, Dieters EI, Rijnders B, Groeneveld JA. Safety and efficacy of amphotericin-B deoxycholate inhalation in critically ill patients with respiratory Candida spp. colonization: a retrospective analysis. BMC Infect Dis. (2014) 14:575. doi: 10.1186/s12879-014-0575-3 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 27. Dadar M, Tiwari R, Karthik K, Chakraborty S, Shahali Y, Dhama K. Candida albicans- biology, molecular characterization, pathogenicity, and advances in diagnosis and control - an update. Microb Pathog. (2018) 117:128–38. doi: 10.1016/j.micpath.2018.02.028 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 28. Timsit JF, Azoulay E, Schwebel C, Charles PE, Cornet M, Souweine B, et al. Empirical micafungin treatment and survival without invasive fungal infection in adults with ICU-acquired sepsis, candida colonization, and multiple organ failure: the EMPIRICUS randomized clinical trial. JAMA. (2016) 316:1555–64. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.14655 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 29. Timsit JF, Schwebel C, Styfalova L, Cornet M, Poirier P, Forrestier C, et al. Impact of bronchial colonization with Candida spp. on the risk of bacterial ventilator-associated pneumonia in the ICU: the FUNGIBACT prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med. (2019) 45:834–43. doi: 10.1007/s00134-019-05622-0 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 30. Yu Y, Li J, Wang S, Gao Y, Shen H, Lu L. Effect of Candida albicans bronchial colonization on hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Transl Med. (2019) 7:673. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.10.44 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 31. Huang D, Qi M, Hu Y, Yu M, Liang Z. The impact of Candida spp airway colonization on clinical outcomes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Infect Control. (2020) 48:695–701. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.11.002 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Keywords: Candida, colonization, ventilator associate pneumonia, critical ill patients, bioflim Citation: Liu J, Yu Y-T, Xu C-H and Chen D-C (2021) Candida Colonization in the Respiratory Tract: What Is the Significance? Front. Med. 7:598037. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.598037 Received: 23 August 2020; Accepted: 18 December 2020; Published: 04 February 2021. Edited by: Reviewed by: Copyright © 2021 Liu, Yu, Xu and Chen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. *Correspondence: De-Chang Chen, [email protected] These authors have contributed equally to this work
Page of 1
Articles per Page
by
Show export options
  Select all
Back to Top Top