Exploiting sweet relief for preeclampsia by targeting autophagy-lysosomal machinery and proteinopathy.

The etiology of preeclampsia (PE), a severe complication of pregnancy with several clinical manifestations and a high incidence of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality, remains unclear. This issue is a major hurdle for effective treatment strategies. We recently demonstrated that PE exhibits an Alzheimer-like etiology of impaired autophagy and proteinopathy in the placenta. Targeting of these pathological pathways may be a novel therapeutic strategy for PE. Stimulation of autophagy with the natural disaccharide trehalose and its lacto analog lactotrehalose in hypoxia-exposed primary human trophoblasts restored autophagy, inhibited the accumulation of toxic protein aggregates, and restored the ultrastructural features of autophagosomes and autolysosomes. Importantly, trehalose and lactotrehalose inhibited the onset of PE-like features in a humanized mouse model by normalizing autophagy and inhibiting protein aggregation in the placenta. These disaccharides restored the autophagy-lysosomal biogenesis machinery by increasing nuclear translocation of the master transcriptional regulator TFEB. RNA-seq analysis of the placentas of mice with PE indicated the normalization of the PE-associated transcriptome profile in response to trehalose and lactotrehalose. In summary, our results provide a novel molecular rationale for impaired autophagy and proteinopathy in patients with PE and identify treatment with trehalose and its lacto analog as promising therapeutic options for this severe pregnancy complication.

Key factors for establishing and sustaining a successful palliative radiation oncology program: a survey of the Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Dedicated palliative radiation oncology programs (PROPs) within radiation oncology (RO) practices have been shown to improve quality and decrease costs of radiation therapy (RT) in advanced cancer patients. Despite this, relatively few PROPs currently exist, highlighting an unmet need to understand characteristics of the few existing PROPs and the potential barriers and facilitators that exist in starting and maintaining a successful PROP. We sought to assess the attributes of existing PROPs, the facilitators and barriers to establishing these programs, and the resources needed to create and maintain a successful program. METHODS: A 15-item online survey was sent to 157 members of the Society of Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) in July 2019. RESULTS: Of the 157 members, 48 (31%) responded. Most practiced in an academic center (71% at main center and 15% at satellite) and 75% were from a larger group practice (≥6 physicians). Most (89%) believed the development and growth of a dedicated PROPs was either important (50%) or most important (39%) to the field of RO. Only 36% of respondents had a PROP, 38% wanted to establish one, and 13% were currently developing one. Of those with PROPs (N=16), 75% perceived an increase in the number of referrals for palliative RT since starting the program. A majority had an ability to refer to an outside palliative care specialist (64%), an outpatient RO service (53%), and specialized clinical processes for managing palliative radiotherapy patients (53%), with 41% having an inpatient RO consult service. Resources considered most essential were access to specialist-level palliative care, advanced practice provider support, a radiation oncologist with an interest in palliative care, having an outpatient palliative RO clinic, an emphasis on administering short radiation courses, and opportunities for educational development. Of those with a PROP or those who have tried to start one, the greatest perceived barriers to initiating a PROP were committed resources (83%), blocked out clinical time (61%), challenges coordinating management of patients (61%), and support from leaders/colleagues (61%). Perceived barriers to sustaining a PROP were similar. For those without a PROP, the perceived most important resources for starting one included access to palliative care specialist by referral (83%), published guidelines with best practices (80%), educational materials for referring physicians and patients (80%), educational sessions for clinical staff (83%), and standardized clinical pathways (80%). CONCLUSIONS: PROPs are not widespread, exist mainly within academic centers, are outpatient, have access to palliative care specialists by referral, and have specialized clinical processes for palliative radiation patients. Lack of committed resources was the single most important perceived barrier for initiating or maintaining a PROP. Best practice guidelines, educational resources, access to palliative care specialists and standardized pathways are most important for those who wish to develop a PROP. These insights can inform discussions and help align resources to develop, grow, and maintain a successful PROP.