SUR1 Receptor Interaction with Hesperidin and Linarin Predicts Possible Mechanisms of Action of Valeriana officinalis in Parkinson.

Parkinson's disease (PD) is one of the most common neurodegenerative disorders. A theoretical approach of our previous experiments reporting the cytoprotective effects of the Valeriana officinalis compounds extract for PD is suggested. In addiction to considering the PD as a result of mitochondrial metabolic imbalance and oxidative stress, such as in our previous in vitro model of rotenone, in the present manuscript we added a genomic approach to evaluate the possible underlying mechanisms of the effect of the plant extract. Microarray of substantia nigra (SN) genome obtained from Allen Brain Institute was analyzed using gene set enrichment analysis to build a network of hub genes implicated in PD. Proteins transcribed from hub genes and their ligands selected by search ensemble approach algorithm were subjected to molecular docking studies, as well as 20 ns Molecular Dynamics (MD) using a Molecular Mechanic Poison/Boltzman Surface Area (MMPBSA) protocol. Our results bring a new approach to Valeriana officinalis extract, and suggest that hesperidin, and probably linarin are able to relieve effects of oxidative stress during ATP depletion due to its ability to binding SUR1. In addition, the key role of valerenic acid and apigenin is possibly related to prevent cortical hyperexcitation by inducing neuronal cells from SN to release GABA on brain stem. Thus, under hyperexcitability, oxidative stress, asphyxia and/or ATP depletion, Valeriana officinalis may trigger different mechanisms to provide neuronal cell protection.Fil: Santos, Gesivaldo. Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia; BrasilFil: Giraldez Alvarez, Lisandro Diego. Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia; BrasilFil: Ávila Rodriguez, Marco. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; ColombiaFil: Capani, Francisco. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Investigaciones Cardiológicas. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Investigaciones Cardiológicas; ArgentinaFil: Galembeck, Eduardo. Universidade Estadual de Campinas; BrasilFil: Gôes Neto, Aristóteles. Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana; BrasilFil: Barreto, George E.. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; ColombiaFil: Andrade, Bruno. Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia; Brasi

Protection by Neuroglobin Expression in Brain Pathologies

Astrocytes play an important role in physiological, metabolic, and structural functions, and when impaired, they can be involved in various pathologies including Alzheimer, focal ischemic stroke, and traumatic brain injury. These disorders involve an imbalance in the blood flow and nutrients such as glucose and lactate, leading to biochemical and molecular changes that cause neuronal damage, which is followed by loss of cognitive and motor functions. Previous studies have shown that astrocytes are more resilient than neurons during brain insults as a consequence of their more effective antioxidant systems, transporters, and enzymes, which made them less susceptible to excitotoxicity. In addition, astrocytes synthesize and release different protective molecules for neurons, including neuroglobin, a member of the globin family of proteins. After brain injury, neuroglobin expression is induced in astrocytes. Since neuroglobin promotes neuronal survival, its increased expression in astrocytes after brain injury may represent an endogenous neuroprotective mechanism. Here, we review the role of neuroglobin in the central nervous system, its relationship with different pathologies, and the role of different factors that regulate its expression in astrocytes.GB’s work is supported by Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.Peer reviewedPeer Reviewe

The evolution of the ventilatory ratio is a prognostic factor in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients

Background: Mortality due to COVID-19 is high, especially in patients requiring mechanical ventilation. The purpose of the study is to investigate associations between mortality and variables measured during the first three days of mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19 intubated at ICU admission. Methods: Multicenter, observational, cohort study includes consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to 44 Spanish ICUs between February 25 and July 31, 2020, who required intubation at ICU admission and mechanical ventilation for more than three days. We collected demographic and clinical data prior to admission; information about clinical evolution at days 1 and 3 of mechanical ventilation; and outcomes. Results: Of the 2,095 patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU, 1,118 (53.3%) were intubated at day 1 and remained under mechanical ventilation at day three. From days 1 to 3, PaO2/FiO2 increased from 115.6 [80.0-171.2] to 180.0 [135.4-227.9] mmHg and the ventilatory ratio from 1.73 [1.33-2.25] to 1.96 [1.61-2.40]. In-hospital mortality was 38.7%. A higher increase between ICU admission and day 3 in the ventilatory ratio (OR 1.04 [CI 1.01-1.07], p = 0.030) and creatinine levels (OR 1.05 [CI 1.01-1.09], p = 0.005) and a lower increase in platelet counts (OR 0.96 [CI 0.93-1.00], p = 0.037) were independently associated with a higher risk of death. No association between mortality and the PaO2/FiO2 variation was observed (OR 0.99 [CI 0.95 to 1.02], p = 0.47). Conclusions: Higher ventilatory ratio and its increase at day 3 is associated with mortality in patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation at ICU admission. No association was found in the PaO2/FiO2 variation

Clustering COVID-19 ARDS patients through the first days of ICU admission. An analysis of the CIBERESUCICOVID Cohort

Background Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) can be classified into sub-phenotypes according to different inflammatory/clinical status. Prognostic enrichment was achieved by grouping patients into hypoinflammatory or hyperinflammatory sub-phenotypes, even though the time of analysis may change the classification according to treatment response or disease evolution. We aimed to evaluate when patients can be clustered in more than 1 group, and how they may change the clustering of patients using data of baseline or day 3, and the prognosis of patients according to their evolution by changing or not the cluster.Methods Multicenter, observational prospective, and retrospective study of patients admitted due to ARDS related to COVID-19 infection in Spain. Patients were grouped according to a clustering mixed-type data algorithm (k-prototypes) using continuous and categorical readily available variables at baseline and day 3.Results Of 6205 patients, 3743 (60%) were included in the study. According to silhouette analysis, patients were grouped in two clusters. At baseline, 1402 (37%) patients were included in cluster 1 and 2341(63%) in cluster 2. On day 3, 1557(42%) patients were included in cluster 1 and 2086 (57%) in cluster 2. The patients included in cluster 2 were older and more frequently hypertensive and had a higher prevalence of shock, organ dysfunction, inflammatory biomarkers, and worst respiratory indexes at both time points. The 90-day mortality was higher in cluster 2 at both clustering processes (43.8% [n = 1025] versus 27.3% [n = 383] at baseline, and 49% [n = 1023] versus 20.6% [n = 321] on day 3). Four hundred and fifty-eight (33%) patients clustered in the first group were clustered in the second group on day 3. In contrast, 638 (27%) patients clustered in the second group were clustered in the first group on day 3.Conclusions During the first days, patients can be clustered into two groups and the process of clustering patients may change as they continue to evolve. This means that despite a vast majority of patients remaining in the same cluster, a minority reaching 33% of patients analyzed may be re-categorized into different clusters based on their progress. Such changes can significantly impact their prognosis

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

L-Type Calcium Channels Modulation by Estradiol

Voltage-gated calcium channels are key regulators of brain function, and their dysfunction has been associated with multiple conditions and neurodegenerative diseases because they couple membrane depolarization to the influx of calcium—and other processes such as gene expression—in excitable cells. L-type calcium channels, one of the three major classes and probably the best characterized of the voltage-gated calcium channels, act as an essential calcium binding proteins with a significant biological relevance. It is well known that estradiol can activate rapidly brain signaling pathways and modulatory/regulatory proteins through non-genomic (or non-transcriptional) mechanisms, which lead to an increase of intracellular calcium that activate multiple kinases and signaling cascades, in the same way as L-type calcium channels responses. In this context, estrogens—L-type calcium channels signaling raises intracellular calcium levels and activates the same signaling cascades in the brain probably through estrogen receptor-independent modulatory mechanisms. In this review, we discuss the available literature on this area, which seems to suggest that estradiol exerts dual effects/modulation on these channels in a concentration-dependent manner (as a potentiator of these channels in pM concentrations and as an inhibitor in nM concentrations). Indeed, estradiol may orchestrate multiple neurotrophic responses, which open a new avenue for the development of novel estrogen-based therapies to alleviate different neuropathologies. We also highlight that it is essential to determine through computational and/or experimental approaches the interaction between estradiol and L-type calcium channels to assist these developments, which is an interesting area of research that deserves a closer look in future biomedical research.This work was in part funded by PUJ grants #5544 and 5608 to GEB, and #6243, 5619 and 6371 to JG

Sleep Disorders Associated With Alzheimer's Disease: A Perspective

Sleep disturbances, as well as sleep-wake rhythm disturbances, are typical symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD) that may precede the other clinical signs of this neurodegenerative disease. Here, we describe clinical features of sleep disorders in AD and the relation between sleep disorders and both cognitive impairment and poor prognosis of the disease. There are difficulties of the diagnosis of sleep disorders based on sleep questionnaires, polysomnography or actigraphy in the AD patients. Typical disturbances of the neurophysiological sleep architecture in the course of the AD include deep sleep and paradoxical sleep deprivation. Among sleep disorders occurring in patients with AD, the most frequent disorders are sleep breathing disorders and restless legs syndrome. Sleep disorders may influence circadian fluctuations of the concentrations of amyloid-β in the interstitial brain fluid and in the cerebrovascular fluid related to the glymphatic brain system and production of the amyloid-β. There is accumulating evidence suggesting that disordered sleep contributes to cognitive decline and the development of AD pathology. In this mini-review, we highlight and discuss the association between sleep disorders and AD