In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[EX Q]: Context: HIV-1-infected and/or immune-activated microglia and macrophages are pivotal in the pathogenesis of HIV-1-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND). Glutaminase, a metabolic enzyme that facilitates glutamate generation, is upregulated and may play a pathogenic role in HAND. Our previous studies have demonstrated that glutaminase is released to the extracellular fluid during HIV-1 infection and neuroinflammation. However, key molecular mechanisms that regulate glutaminase release remain unknown. Recent advances in understanding intercellular trafficking have identified microvesicles (MVs) as a novel means of shedding cellular contents. We posit that during HIV-1 infection and immune activation, microvesicles may mediate glutaminase release, generating excessive and neurotoxic levels of glutamate.', 'MVs isolated through differential centrifugation from cell-free supernatants of monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM) and BV2 microglia cell lines were first confirmed in electron microscopy and immunoblotting. As expected, we found elevated number of MVs, glutaminase immunoreactivities, as well as glutaminase enzyme activity in the supernatants of HIV-1 infected MDM and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-activated microglia when compared with controls. The elevated glutaminase was blocked by GW4869, a neutral sphingomyelinase inhibitor known to inhibit MVs release, suggesting a critical role of MVs in mediating glutaminase release. More importantly, MVs from HIV-1-infected MDM and LPS-activated microglia induced significant neuronal injury in rat cortical neuron cultures. The MV neurotoxicity was blocked by a glutaminase inhibitor or GW4869, suggesting that the neurotoxic potential of HIV-1-infected MDM and LPS-activated microglia is dependent on the glutaminase-containing MVs.\Question: Do glutaminase-containing microvesicles from HIV-1-infected macrophages and immune-activated microglia induce neurotoxicity?
[EX A]: These findings support MVs as a potential pathway/mechanism of excessive glutamate generation and neurotoxicity in HAND and therefore MVs may serve as a novel therapeutic target.

[EX Q]: Context: The previous study by the Polish Adult Leukemia Group has demonstrated that addition of cladribine to standard DNR+AraC induction potentiates the antileukemic activity. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy of bone marrow or peripheral blood hematopoietic cell collection in patients who obtained remission after daunorubicine plus cytarabine induction with cladribine (DAC-7) or without addition of cladribine (DA-7) in preparation for autotransplantation.', 'Sixty-six patients aged 41 years (range, 17-58 years) were included in this study: 33 cases in the DAC-7 and 33 in the DA-7 arm. Hematopoietic cells were collected from the bone marrow (ABMT, n = 29) or from the peripheral blood (ABCT, n = 37) using cytopheresis after administration of AraC (2 x 2 g/m2) on days 1, 3, 5 and subsequent G-CSF (10 microg/kg) from day 7 as mobilization therapy.', 'The numbers of harvested CD34+ cells were similar in the DAC-7 and DA-7 pretreated patients both after harvesting from peripheral blood (2.55 x 10(6)/kg vs 2.5 x 10(6)/kg) and from bone marrow (1.62 x 10(6)/kg vs 1.55 x 10(6)/kg), respectively. The proportion of patients with sufficient material for autologous bone marrow transplantation was higher in the DAC-7 compared with the DA-7 arm. All patients engrafted; hematopoietic recovery was similar in both subgroups.\Question: Does addition of cladribine to induction/consolidation regimen impair peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and bone marrow harvest for autotransplantation in acute myeloid leukemia patients?
[EX A]: Addition of cladribine to a standard DA induction does not impair the harvesting of hematopoietic cells and their engraftment after autotransplantation.

[EX Q]: Context: During early brain development, the organisation of neural progenitors into a neuroepithelial sheet maintains tissue integrity during growth. Neuroepithelial cohesion and patterning is essential for orderly proliferation and neural fate specification. Neuroepithelia are regionalised by the expression of transcription factors and signalling molecules, resulting in the formation of distinct developmental, and ultimately functional, domains.', 'We have discovered that the Six3/6 family orthologue Optix is an essential regulator of neuroepithelial maintenance and patterning in the Drosophila brain. Six3 and Six6 are required for mammalian eye and forebrain development, and mutations in humans are associated with severe eye and brain malformation. In Drosophila, Optix is expressed in a sharply defined region of the larval optic lobe, and its expression is reciprocal to that of the transcription factor Vsx1. Optix gain- and loss-of-function affects neuroepithelial adhesion, integrity and polarity. We find restricted cell lineage boundaries that correspond to transcription factor expression domains.\Question: Does optix define a neuroepithelial compartment in the optic lobe of the Drosophila brain?
[EX A]:
We propose that the optic lobe is compartmentalised by expression of Optix and Vsx1. Our findings provide insight into the spatial patterning of a complex region of the brain, and suggest an evolutionarily conserved principle of visual system development.