Explore the vast range of titles available.

Gut microbiota regulate intestinal function and health. However, mounting evidence indicates that they can also influence the immune and nervous systems and vice versa. This article reviews the bidirectional relationship between the gut microbiota and the brain, termed the microbiota-gut-brain (MGB) axis, and discusses how it contributes to the pathogenesis of certain disorders that may involve brain inflammation. Articles were identified with a search of Medline (starting in 1980) by using the key words anxiety, attention-deficit hypersensitivity disorder (ADHD), autism, cytokines, depression, gut, hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis, inflammation, immune system, microbiota, nervous system, neurologic, neurotransmitters, neuroimmune conditions, psychiatric, and stress. Various afferent or efferent pathways are involved in the MGB axis. Antibiotics, environmental and infectious agents, intestinal neurotransmitters/neuromodulators, sensory vagal fibers, cytokines, and essential metabolites all convey information to the central nervous system about the intestinal state. Conversely, the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis, the central nervous system regulatory areas of satiety, and neuropeptides released from sensory nerve fibers affect the gut microbiota composition directly or through nutrient availability. Such interactions seem to influence the pathogenesis of a number of disorders in which inflammation is implicated, such as mood disorder, autism-spectrum disorders, attention-deficit hypersensitivity disorder, multiple sclerosis, and obesity. Recognition of the relationship between the MGB axis and the neuroimmune systems provides a novel approach for better understanding and management of these disorders. Appropriate preventive measures early in life or corrective measures such as use of psychobiotics, fecal microbiota transplantation, and flavonoids are discussed.

Brain \"fog\" is a constellation of symptoms that include reduced cognition, inability to concentrate and multitask, as well as loss of short and long term memory. Brain \"fog\" characterizes patients with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), celiac disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, mastocytosis, and postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS), as well as \"minimal cognitive impairment,\" an early clinical presentation of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other neuropsychiatric disorders. Brain \"fog\" may be due to inflammatory molecules, including adipocytokines and histamine released from mast cells (MCs) further stimulating microglia activation, and causing focal brain inflammation. Recent reviews have described the potential use of natural flavonoids for the treatment of neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative diseases. The flavone luteolin has numerous useful actions that include: anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory, microglia inhibition, neuroprotection, and memory increase. A liposomal luteolin formulation in olive fruit extract improved attention in children with ASDs and brain \"fog\" in mastocytosis patients. Methylated luteolin analogs with increased activity and better bioavailability could be developed into effective treatments for neuropsychiatric disorders and brain \"fog.\"

As many as 40% of people have sensitive skin and at least half of them suffer from pruritus associated with allergies, atopic dermatitis (AD), chronic urticaria (CU), cutaneous mastocytosis (CM), and psoriasis. Unfortunately, the available topical formulations contain antihistamines that are often not as effective as those containing corticosteroids. Certain natural flavonoids have anti-inflammatory actions. We recently reported that the natural flavonoid tetramethoxyluteolin has potent antiallergic and anti-inflammatory actions in vitro and in vivo. This flavonoid was formulated in a skin lotion along with olive fruit extract and was first tested for tolerability in 25 patients with mastocytosis or mast cell activation syndrome and very sensitive skin who reported back through a questionnaire. The skin lotion was then used by eight patients, four with AD and four with psoriasis, who had not received any topical treatment for at least 2 months, twice daily for 2 weeks. The use of this tetramethoxyluteolin formulation resulted in significant improvement of the skin lesions and could be useful adjuvant treatment for allergic and inflammatory skin conditions.

Mast cell (MC) activation disorders present with multiple symptoms including flushing, pruritus, hypotension, gastrointestinal complaints, irritability, headaches, concentration/memory loss and neuropsychiatric issues. These disorders are classified as: cutaneous and systemic mastocytosis with a c-kit mutation and clonal MC activation disorder, allergies, urticarias and inflammatory disorders and mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), idiopathic urticaria and angioedema. MCs are activated by IgE, but also by cytokines, environmental, food, infectious, drug and stress triggers, leading to secretion of multiple mediators. The symptom profile and comorbidities associated with these disorders, such as chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia, are confusing. We propose the use of the term 'spectrum' and highlight the main symptoms, useful diagnostic tests and treatment approaches.

The skin is considered the mirror of the soul and is affected by neurohormonal triggers, especially stress. Hair follicles, keratinocytes, mast cells, melanocytes, and sebocytes all express sex and stress hormones implicating them in a local “hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.” In particular, the peptides corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) and neurotensin (NT) have synergistic action stimulating mast cells and are uniquely elevated in the serum of patients with skin diseases exacerbated by stress. Addressing the neurohormonal regulation of skin function could lead to new targets for effective treatment of inflammatory skin diseases.

Stony coral tissue loss disease (SCTLD) has been causing significant whole colony mortality on reefs in Florida and the Caribbean. The cause of SCTLD remains unknown, with limited concurrence of SCTLD-associated bacteria among studies. We conducted a meta-analysis of SSU 16S ribosomal RNA gene datasets generated by 16 field and laboratory SCTLD studies to find consistent bacteria associated with SCTLD across disease zones (vulnerable, endemic, and epidemic), coral species, coral compartments (mucus, tissue, and skeleton), and disease states (apparently healthy colony tissue [AH], and unaffected [DU] and lesion [DL] tissue from diseased colonies). We also evaluated bacteria in seawater and sediment, which may be sources of SCTLD transmission. Although AH colonies in endemic and epidemic zones harbor bacteria associated with SCTLD lesions, and aquaria and field samples had distinct microbial compositions, there were still clear differences in the microbial composition among AH, DU, and DL in the combined dataset. Alpha diversity between AH and DL was not different; however, DU showed increased alpha diversity compared to AH, indicating that, prior to lesion formation, corals may undergo a disturbance to the microbiome. This disturbance may be driven by Flavobacteriales, which were especially enriched in DU. While Rhodobacterales and Peptostreptococcales-Tissierellales were prominent in structuring microbial interactions in DL. Peptostreptococcales-Tissierellales specifically may contribute to lesion progression through an alpha-toxin. We provide a consensus of SCTLD-associated bacteria both prior to and during lesion progression and identify how these taxa vary across studies, coral species, coral compartments, seawater, and sediment. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Although most patients with epithelial ovarian cancer respond to frontline platinum-based chemotherapy, around 70% will relapse within 3 years. The phase 3 JAVELIN Ovarian 100 trial compared avelumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) in combination with chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, or chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, versus chemotherapy alone in patients with treatment-naive epithelial ovarian cancer. JAVELIN Ovarian 100 was a global, open-label, three-arm, parallel, randomised, phase 3 trial run at 159 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 25 countries. Eligible women were aged 18 years and older with stage III–IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (following debulking surgery, or candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive chemotherapy (six cycles; carboplatin dosed at an area under the serum-concentration-time curve of 5 or 6 intravenously every 3 weeks plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or 80 mg/m2 once a week [investigators' choice]) followed by avelumab maintenance (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks; avelumab maintenance group); chemotherapy plus avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) followed by avelumab maintenance (avelumab combination group); or chemotherapy followed by observation (control group). Randomisation was in permuted blocks of size six and stratified by paclitaxel regimen and resection status. Patients and investigators were masked to assignment to the two chemotherapy groups without avelumab at the time of randomisation until completion of the chemotherapy phase. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review in all randomly assigned patients (analysed by intention to treat). Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02718417. The trial was fully enrolled and terminated at interim analysis due to futility, and efficacy is no longer being assessed. Between May 19, 2016 and Jan 23, 2018, 998 patients were randomly assigned (avelumab maintenance n=332, avelumab combination n=331, and control n=335). At the planned interim analysis (data cutoff Sept 7, 2018), prespecified futility boundaries were crossed for the progression-free survival analysis, and the trial was stopped as recommended by the independent data monitoring committee and endorsed by the protocol steering committee. Median follow-up for progression-free survival for all patients was 10·8 months (IQR 7·1–14·9); 11·1 months (7·0–15·3) for the avelumab maintenance group, 11·0 months (7·4–14·5) for the avelumab combination group, and 10·2 months (6·7–14·0) for the control group. Median progression-free survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 13·5–not estimable [NE]) with avelumab maintenance, 18·1 months (14·8–NE) with avelumab combination treatment, and NE (18·2 months–NE) with control treatment. The stratified hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 1·43 (95% CI 1·05–1·95; one-sided p=0·99) with the avelumab maintenance regimen and 1·14 (0·83–1·56; one-sided p=0·79) with the avelumab combination regimen, versus control treatment. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were anaemia (69 [21%] patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 63 [19%] in the avelumab combination group, and 53 [16%] in the control group), neutropenia (91 [28%], 99 [30%], and 88 [26%]), and neutrophil count decrease (49 [15%], 45 [14%], and 59 [18%]). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 92 (28%) patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 118 (36%) in the avelumab combination group, and 64 (19%) in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in one (<1%) patient in the avelumab maintenance group (due to atrial fibrillation) and one (<1%) patient in the avelumab combination group (due to disease progression). Although no new safety signals were observed, results do not support the use of avelumab in the frontline treatment setting. Alternative treatment regimens are needed to improve outcomes in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

International and regional policies aimed at managing ocean ecosystem health need quantitative and comprehensive indices to synthesize information from a variety of sources, consistently measure progress, and communicate with key constituencies and the public. Here we present the second annual global assessment of the Ocean Health Index, reporting current scores and annual changes since 2012, recalculated using updated methods and data based on the best available science, for 221 coastal countries and territories. The Index measures performance of ten societal goals for healthy oceans on a quantitative scale of increasing health from 0 to 100, and combines these scores into a single Index score, for each country and globally. The global Index score improved one point (from 67 to 68), while many country-level Index and goal scores had larger changes. Per-country Index scores ranged from 41-95 and, on average, improved by 0.06 points (range -8 to +12). Globally, average scores increased for individual goals by as much as 6.5 points (coastal economies) and decreased by as much as 1.2 points (natural products). Annual updates of the Index, even when not all input data have been updated, provide valuable information to scientists, policy makers, and resource managers because patterns and trends can emerge from the data that have been updated. Changes of even a few points indicate potential successes (when scores increase) that merit recognition, or concerns (when scores decrease) that may require mitigative action, with changes of more than 10-20 points representing large shifts that deserve greater attention. Goal scores showed remarkably little covariance across regions, indicating low redundancy in the Index, such that each goal delivers information about a different facet of ocean health. Together these scores provide a snapshot of global ocean health and suggest where countries have made progress and where a need for further improvement exists.

The Ocean Health Index (OHI) is a framework to assess ocean health by considering many benefits (called 'goals') provided by the ocean provides to humans, such as food provision, tourism opportunities, and coastal protection. The OHI framework can be used to assess marine areas at global or regional scales, but how various OHI goals should be weighted to reflect priorities at those scales remains unclear. In this study, we adapted the framework in two ways for application to Canada as a case study. First, we customized the OHI goals to create a national Canadian Ocean Health Index (COHI). In particular, we altered the list of iconic species assessed, added methane clathrates and subsea permafrost as carbon storage habitats, and developed a new goal, 'Aboriginal Needs', to measure access of Aboriginal people to traditional marine hunting and fishing grounds. Second, we evaluated various goal weighting schemes based on preferences elicited from the general public in online surveys. We quantified these public preferences in three ways: using Likert scores, simple ranks from a best-worst choice experiment, and model coefficients from the analysis of elicited choice experiment. The latter provided the clearest statistical discrimination among goals, and we recommend their use because they can more accurately reflect both public opinion and the trade-offs faced by policy-makers. This initial iteration of the COHI can be used as a baseline against which future COHI scores can be compared, and could potentially be used as a management tool to prioritise actions on a national scale and predict public support for these actions given that the goal weights are based on public priorities.