Elmore Susan A, Dixon Darlene, Hailey James R, Harada Takanori, Herbert Ronald A, Maronpot Robert R, Nolte Thomas, Rehg Jerold E, Rittinghausen Susanne, Rosol Thomas J, Satoh Hiroshi, Vidal Justin D, Willard-Mack Cynthia L, Creasy Dianne M
Cellular and Molecular Pathology Branch, National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
Molecular Pathogenesis Group, National Toxicology Program Laboratory, Division of the NTP, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Toxicol Pathol. 2016 Feb;44(2):173-88. doi: 10.1177/0192623315625859. Epub 2016 Feb 14.
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 whenThere is no requirement or need to split the processes, orWhen the nature of cell death cannot be determined with certainty, orWhen 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.
从历史上看,对于个体细胞死亡的诊断命名一直存在混淆。毒理病理学家通常将“单细胞坏死”和“凋亡”这两个术语互换使用。近年来,对细胞死亡机制的研究不断增加,人们逐渐认识到凋亡和坏死涉及不同的细胞途径,并且这些差异在考虑整体毒性机制时可能具有重要意义。因此,只要有可能进行区分,就应使用凋亡和坏死这两个单独的术语。然而,人们也认识到,在常规毒性研究中,区分细胞死亡的确切途径可能并不重要、不必要或不可能,因此在这些情况下需要一个更通用的术语来表示细胞死亡。这两种细胞死亡形式之间的形态学区分有时可能很直接,但也可能具有挑战性。本文简要讨论了凋亡和坏死的细胞机制及形态学特征,以及病理学家何时应使用这些术语的指导意见。它提供了推荐的命名法以及最常见细胞死亡形式(凋亡和坏死)在苏木精和伊红(H&E)染色切片中的诊断标准。本文件旨在作为国际命名和诊断标准组织工作组及广大毒理病理学界细胞死亡命名的当前指导意见。具体建议如下:
将坏死和凋亡作为单独的诊断术语使用。
使用修饰词来表示坏死的分布(例如,坏死,单细胞;坏死,局灶性;坏死,弥漫性等)。
当出现以下情况时,使用凋亡/单细胞坏死这一组合术语:
不需要或无需区分这两个过程,
或无法确定细胞死亡的性质,
或两个过程同时存在。诊断应主要基于H&E染色切片中的形态学特征。如有需要,也可使用其他特殊技术来识别和表征凋亡。