IRF8 is a transcriptional activator of CD37 expression in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) represents the most common form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) that is still incurable in a large fraction of patients. Tetraspanin CD37 is highly expressed on mature B lymphocytes, and multiple CD37-targeting therapies are under clinical development for NHL. However, CD37 expression is nondetectable in ∼50% of DLBCL patients, which correlates with inferior treatment outcome, but the underlying mechanisms for differential CD37 expression in DLBCL are still unknown. Here, we investigated the regulation of the CD37 gene in human DLBCL at the (epi-)genetic and transcriptional level. No differences were observed in DNA methylation within the CD37 promoter region between CD37-positive and CD37-negative primary DLBCL patient samples. On the contrary, CD37-negative DLBCL cells specifically lacked CD37 promoter activity, suggesting differential regulation of CD37 gene expression. Using an unbiased quantitative proteomic approach, we identified transcription factor IRF8 to be significantly higher expressed in nuclear extracts of CD37-positive as compared with CD37-negative DLBCL. Direct binding of IRF8 to the CD37 promoter region was confirmed by DNA pulldown assay combined with mass spectrometry and targeted chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP). Functional analysis indicated that IRF8 overexpression enhanced CD37 protein expression, while CRISPR/Cas9 knockout of IRF8 decreased CD37 levels in DLBCL cell lines. Immunohistochemical analysis in a large cohort of primary DLBCL (n = 206) revealed a significant correlation of IRF8 expression with detectable CD37 levels. Together, this study provides new insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying differential CD37 expression in human DLBCL and reveals IRF8 as a transcriptional regulator of CD37 in B-cell lymphoma.

[Iron supplementation in iron deficiency anaemia]. / Suppletie van ijzer bij ijzergebreksanemie.

Iron deficiency anaemia is a common problem. The majority of patients are treated with oral iron supplements. The current recommended dosage for oral supplementation of 200 mg ferrous fumarate 3x per day however, is based on a single small study of poor quality. There is no consensus concerning parenteral dosing. In recent years, new insights have been gained regarding both the dosage of oral supplementation and the indication for parenteral supplementation. Oral therapy is preferred. In principle, 100 mg ferrous fumarate once a day is sufficient for the treatment of symptom-free patients with anaemia. In cases of severe anaemia, or in patients with symptoms, 200 mg/day should be prescribed. If side effects appear, it can be dosed every other day. Where oral therapy does not show effectiveness, the anaemia is severe, or rapid increase of haemoglobin is indicated, parenteral supplementation should be chosen. Parenteral supplementation is more effective than oral supplementation in specific conditions, such as dialysis-dependent renal insufficiency, heart failure or active IBD.

Choosing an Advanced Therapy in Parkinson's Disease; is it an Evidence-Based Decision in Current Practice?

BACKGROUND: In advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), neurologists and patients face a complex decision for an advanced therapy. When choosing a treatment, the best available evidence should be combined with the professional's expertise and the patient's preferences. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore current decision-making in advanced PD. METHODS: We conducted focus group discussions and individual interviews with patients (N = 20) who had received deep brain stimulation, Levodopa-Carbidopa intestinal gel, or subcutaneous apomorphine infusion, and with their caregivers (N = 16). Furthermore, we conducted semi-structured interviews with neurologists (N = 7) and PD nurse specialists (N = 3) to include the perspectives of all key players in this decision-making process. Data were analyzed by two researchers using a qualitative thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Four themes representing current experiences with the decision-making process were identified: 1) information and information needs, 2) factors influencing treatment choice and individual decision strategies, 3) decision-making roles, and 4) barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making (SDM). Patient preferences were taken into account, however patients were not always provided with adequate information. The professional's expertise influenced the decision-making process in both positive and negative ways. Although professionals and patients considered SDM essential for the decision of an advanced treatment, they mentioned several barriers for the implementation in current practice. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found several factors explaining why in current practice, evidence-based decision-making in advanced PD is not optimal. An important first step would be to develop objective information on all treatment options.