Recommendations from the INHAND Apoptosis/Necrosis Working Group
-
- Susan A. Elmore
- Cellular and Molecular Pathology Branch, National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
-
- Darlene Dixon
- Molecular Pathogenesis Group, National Toxicology Program Laboratory, Division of the NTP, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
-
- James R. Hailey
- Covance Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, USA
-
- Takanori Harada
- The Institute of Environmental Toxicology, Joso-shi, Ibaraki, Japan
-
- Ronald A. Herbert
- Cellular and Molecular Pathology Branch, National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
-
- Robert R. Maronpot
- Maronpot Consulting LLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
-
- Thomas Nolte
- Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach an der Riss, Germany
-
- Jerold E. Rehg
- Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
-
- Susanne Rittinghausen
- Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine ITEM, Hannover, Germany
-
- Thomas J. Rosol
- Department of Veterinary Biosciences, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
-
- Hiroshi Satoh
- Iwate University, Morioka, Iwate, Japan
-
- Justin D. Vidal
- Vet Path Services Inc. (VPS), Mason, Ohio, USA
-
- Cynthia L. Willard-Mack
- Envigo, East Millstone, New Jersey, USA
-
- Dianne M. Creasy
- Envigo, East Millstone, New Jersey, USA
説明
<jats:p> Historically, there has been confusion relating to the diagnostic nomenclature for individual cell death. Toxicologic pathologists have generally used the terms “single cell necrosis” and “apoptosis” interchangeably. Increased research on the mechanisms of cell death in recent years has led to the understanding that apoptosis and necrosis involve different cellular pathways and that these differences can have important implications when considering overall mechanisms of toxicity, and, for these reasons, the separate terms of apoptosis and necrosis should be used whenever differentiation is possible. However, it is also recognized that differentiation of the precise pathway of cell death may not be important, necessary, or possible in routine toxicity studies and so a more general term to indicate cell death is warranted in these situations. Morphological distinction between these two forms of cell death can sometimes be straightforward but can also be challenging. This article provides a brief discussion of the cellular mechanisms and morphological features of apoptosis and necrosis as well as guidance on when the pathologist should use these terms. It provides recommended nomenclature along with diagnostic criteria (in hematoxylin and eosin [H&E]-stained sections) for the most common forms of cell death (apoptosis and necrosis). This document is intended to serve as current guidance for the nomenclature of cell death for the International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria Organ Working Groups and the toxicologic pathology community at large. The specific recommendations are: Use necrosis and apoptosis as separate diagnostic terms. Use modifiers to denote the distribution of necrosis (e.g., necrosis, single cell; necrosis, focal; necrosis, diffuse; etc.). Use the combined term apoptosis/single cell necrosis when There is no requirement or need to split the processes, or When the nature of cell death cannot be determined with certainty, or When both processes are present together. The diagnosis should be based primarily on the morphological features in H&E-stained sections. When needed, additional, special techniques to identify and characterize apoptosis can also be used. </jats:p>
収録刊行物
-
- Toxicologic Pathology
-
Toxicologic Pathology 44 (2), 173-188, 2016-02
SAGE Publications