Early Targeting of L-Selectin on Leukocytes Promotes Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury, Implicating Novel Mechanisms of Pathogenesis.

L-selectin, a lectin-like receptor on all leukocyte classes, functions in adhesive and signaling roles in the recruitment of myeloid cells from the blood to sites of inflammation. Here, we consider L-selectin as a determinant of neurological recovery in a murine model of spinal cord injury (SCI). Spinal cord-injured, L-selectin knock-out (KO) mice (male) showed improved long-term recovery with greater white matter sparing relative to wild-type (WT) mice and reduced oxidative stress in the injured cord at 72 h post-SCI. There was a partial and transient reduction in accumulation of neutrophils in the injured spinal cords of KOs at 24 h post-injury. To complement these findings with KO mice, we sought a pharmacologic means for lowering L-selectin levels. We found that diclofenac, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), induced the shedding of L-selectin from the cell surface of myeloid subsets, specifically neutrophils and non-classical monocytes, in the blood and the injured spinal cord. Diclofenac administration to injured WT mice enhanced neurological recovery to a level comparable to that of KOs but did not improve recovery in KOs. While diclofenac treatment had no effect on myeloid cell accumulation, there was a reduction in oxidative stress at 72 h post-SCI. These findings implicate L-selectin in secondary pathogenesis beyond a role in leukocyte recruitment and raise the possibility of repurposing diclofenac for the treatment of SCI.

Do we truly see what we think we see? The role of cognitive bias in pathological interpretation.

In the histomorphological grading of prostate carcinoma, pathologists have regularly assigned comparable scores for the architectural Gleason and the now-obsolete nuclear World Health Organization (WHO) grading systems. Although both systems demonstrate good correspondence between grade and survival, they are based on fundamentally different biological criteria. We tested the hypothesis that this apparent concurrence between the two grading systems originates from an interpretation bias in the minds of diagnostic pathologists, rather than reflecting a biological reality. Three pathologists graded 178 prostatectomy specimens, assigning Gleason and WHO scores on glass slides and on digital images of nuclei isolated out of their architectural context. The results were analysed with respect to interdependencies among the grading systems, to tumour recurrence (PSA relapse > 0.1 ng/ml at 48 months) and robust nuclear morphometry, as assessed by computer-assisted image analysis. WHO and Gleason grades were strongly correlated (r = 0.82) and demonstrated identical prognostic power. However, WHO grades correlated poorly with nuclear morphology (r = 0.19). Grading of nuclei isolated out of their architectural context significantly improved accuracy for nuclear morphology (r = 0.55), but the prognostic power was virtually lost. In conclusion, the architectural organization of a tumour, which the pathologist cannot avoid noticing during initial slide viewing at low magnification, unwittingly influences the subsequent nuclear grade assignment. In our study, the prognostic power of the WHO grading system was dependent on visual assessment of tumour growth pattern. We demonstrate for the first time the influence a cognitive bias can have in the generation of an error in diagnostic pathology and highlight a considerable problem in histopathological tumour grading.