Glycans are among the most complex biological molecules found in nature, being composed of monosaccharide units in various combinations and linkages, and featuring diverse and asymmetric types of branching. Until the 1970s, glycan structures were generally represented in scientific publications as chemically accurate drawings, or using standard IUPAC-approved abbreviations (Sharon 1986; McNaught 1997; Chester 1998). However, given the complexity of many glycan structures, it became difficult to represent such molecules in publication figures, especially those involving multistep biosynthetic pathways or multiple structures. Thus, various investigators began to use symbols to represent monosaccharides in glycans. In 1978, Kornfeld and colleagues put forward an elegant and simple system for representation of vertebrate glycans (Kornfeld et al. 1978), and it entered into popular use over the next two decades. This system was eventually adopted and standardized by the editors of the first edition of the textbook Essentials of Glycobiology (Varki et al. 1999). While this adoption increased the popularity of the symbols, the system had some limitations and inconsistencies and did not take advantage of color. Anticipating a revision, the editors developed an updated symbol nomenclature, which was made available to the community in 2005 before the publication of the Second Edition (Varki, Cummings, Esko, Freeze, Stanley, Bertozzi, et al. 2009). This nomenclature was adopted and widely disseminated, especially by the NIGMS-funded Consortium for Functional Glycomics (CFG), which also consulted the scientific community on this issue, thus enhancing acceptance. The official version of the Second Edition nomenclature has since been available in the online version of the textbook. A suggested extended version was then presented at the website Glycopedia. Meanwhile, alternate symbol nomenclature systems have been proposed (Harvey et al. 2009). Issues regarding nomenclature tend to be more controversial than the underlying science (Varki, Cummings, Esko, Freeze, Stanley, Marth, et al. 2009), as there is never one correct answer, and some aspects are matters of taste. For example, the two systems mentioned each have some relative advantages and disadvantages.

Chronic inflammation is a complex process that promotes carcinogenesis and tumor progression; however, the mechanisms by which specific inflammatory mediators contribute to tumor growth remain unclear. We and others recently demonstrated that the inflammatory mediators IL-1β, IL-6, and PGE₂ induce accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) in tumor-bearing individuals. MDSC impair tumor immunity and thereby facilitate carcinogenesis and tumor progression by inhibiting T and NK cell activation, and by polarizing immunity toward a tumor-promoting type 2 phenotype. We now show that this population of immature myeloid cells induced by a given tumor share a common phenotype regardless of their in vivo location (bone marrow, spleen, blood, or tumor site), and that Gr1^highCD11b^highF4/80⁻CD80⁺IL4Rα^+/−Arginase⁺ MDSC are induced by the proinflammatory proteins S100A8/A9. S100A8/A9 proteins bind to carboxylated N-glycans expressed on the receptor for advanced glycation end-products and other cell surface glycoprotein receptors on MDSC, signal through the NF-κB pathway, and promote MDSC migration. MDSC also synthesize and secrete S100A8/A9 proteins that accumulate in the serum of tumor-bearing mice, and in vivo blocking of S100A8/A9 binding to MDSC using an anti-carboxylated glycan Ab reduces MDSC levels in blood and secondary lymphoid organs in mice with metastatic disease. Therefore, the S100 family of inflammatory mediators serves as an autocrine feedback loop that sustains accumulation of MDSC. Since S100A8/A9 activation of MDSC is through the NF-κB signaling pathway, drugs that target this pathway may reduce MDSC levels and be useful therapeutic agents in conjunction with active immunotherapy in cancer patients.

We investigated the mechanism of lysosome-mediated cell death using purified recombinant pro-apoptotic proteins, and cell-free extracts from the human neuronal progenitor cell line NT2. Potential effectors were either isolated lysosomes or purified lysosomal proteases. Purified lysosomal cathepsins B, H, K, L, S, and X or an extract of mouse lysosomes did not directly activate either recombinant caspase zymogens or caspase zymogens present in an NT2 cytosolic extract to any significant extent. In contrast, a cathepsin L-related protease from the protozoan parasiteTrypanosoma cruzi, cruzipain, showed a measurable caspase activation rate. This demonstrated that members of the papain family can directly activate caspases but that mammalian lysosomal members of this family may have been negatively selected for caspase activation to prevent inappropriate induction of apoptosis. Given the lack of evidence for a direct role in caspase activation by lysosomal proteases, we hypothesized that an indirect mode of caspase activation may involve the Bcl-2 family member Bid. In support of this, Bid was cleaved in the presence of lysosomal extracts, at a site six residues downstream from that seen for pathways involving capase 8. Incubation of mitochondria with Bid that had been cleaved by lysosomal extracts resulted in cytochrome c release. Thus, cleavage of Bid may represent a mechanism by which proteases that have leaked from the lysosomes can precipitate cytochrome c release and subsequent caspase activation. This is supported by the finding that cytosolic extracts from mice ablated in the bid gene are impaired in the ability to release cytochrome c in response to lysosome extracts. Together these data suggest that Bid represents a sensor that allows cells to initiate apoptosis in response to widespread adventitious proteolysis.